1
'That's a high degree of danger with no mitigation... red card'
By Liam Heagney
Ian Foster has jumped to the defence of red-carded All Blacks lock Brodie Retallick following his dismissal in the close-run win over Japan on Saturday. The 31-year-old second row was given his marching orders in the 66th minute of the 38-31 victory in Tokyo, the first match in a four-Test tour that includes November games away to Wales, Scotland and England.
ADVERTISEMENT
It was just the eighth time that an All Blacks player had ever been sent off, but the red card left the team having to cling on in a game that Foster’s side ended by getting Richie Mo’unga to kick a late penalty to seal the seven-point win.
The All Blacks were leading 35-24 when the clock was stopped at 65:06 for Georgian referee Nika Amashukeli to review footage of breakdown play that had taken place outside the Japanese 22 with New Zealand looking to recycle ruck ball only to get it slowed by the poaching Kazuki Himeno.
After Rettalick cleared away the nuisance of Himeno with a shoulder to the back of the Japanese player’s neck so that the ball was freed up, the play was halted and Amashukeli was told by his TMO: “We are going to play that for you again. We are going to go back. Have a look at the actions of No4 Black.”
This the referee did and having decided a red card offence had been committed, Amashukeli told Retallick: “You have come from a distance with a tucked shoulder and you have made a contact with the player’s neck. That’s a high degree of danger with no mitigation. That’s a red card.”
Brodie Retallick red carded for this clear-out on Kazuki Himeno ?#JPNvNZL pic.twitter.com/oSnJGyumFs
— Jared Wright (@jaredwright17) October 29, 2022
All Blacks boss Foster didn’t agree with the Retallick sending-off. Speaking post-game in a Sky Sport interview, he said: “We are going to have a good look at it. I certainly didn’t see any intention, apart from trying to move a body. That’s a process we will have to go through.”
Retallick was winning his 99th Test cap in Tokyo and he would have hoped to become an international-level centurion in the coming weeks. However, three-week bans have become the regular punishment at disciplinary hearings for red-carded tackles and that length of suspension would leave the All Blacks forward waiting until 2023 to reach the 100-appearance career milestone.
ADVERTISEMENT
There is an problem with our game, at the moment and it is the fault of World Rugby and Referees.
Firstly, with referees, they have developed their knowledge of the Laws to the detriment of the good of the game - and common sense.
Secondly, World Rugby have re-defined the words ‘foul’, ‘mitigation’, ‘high degree of danger’ and ‘deliberate knock-on’. Foul play, to me, does not mean a technical fault, but a deliberate act of skullduggery. Unless there is a deliberate act, there is no foul play. It should be up to match officials to decide what is ‘foul’ but they are more interested of slavishly, for the sake of their careers, following the dictates of Wold Rugby, and it seems to me that most of the offences fall (forgive me) foul of their interpretation. For God’s sake, referee what they see in front of them.
The classification of all these these ‘offences’ are designed to speed up the game, which is now, on average, approaching two hours long. Occasionally, whilst watching, I have taken to using a stop-watch and I have found that a referee-induced stoppage occurs every 30 seconds. This means that the Laws need a thorough review, unless they have redefined ‘speed up’… or all players are stupid.
There's a degree of irony in this red card for Retallick. Nearly four years ago, not long before the World Cup, Retallick was "cleaned out" some distance away from the ruck, by Pieter Steph du Toit, resulting in a dislocated shoulder (from memory) which ruined Retallick's prep for the World Cup. It was a nasty cleanout that resulted in not even a penalty. My how times have changed.
I don't know, but isn't that how you are supposed to clean out a ruck? Is the arriving player supposed to stop and ask the player over the ball if he would kindly stand up and engage in a grapple while the HB clears the ball.
If you are beaten to the punch, and an opposition player gets over the ball to turn it over before anyone on your team gets anywhere near the ball, you can’t remove them with foul play. Saying “well I couldn’t get him out of there any other way” isn’t an excuse. Next time get there faster and don’t leave the ball carrier exposed.
a rubbish decision. YC at worst that. Little chance the muppets at WR will see it that way.
Obviously Foster is trying to get free pankakes on his next meal, cause his not getting anything out of this one.
No attempt to get under him, if you cant get under you go for the body to rock him back, not slamming your shoulder into his neck. Foster and his staff can waste as much time as they like rewatching footage of a clear red card but at this stage they'd be better off teaching players the rules because this clearly a pattern. Speaking of patterns it seems that whenever NZ are carded in any shape or form Foster comes out guns blazing and you'd swear he hadn't even watched the same clip.
No attempt!?....he is not able to burrow underneath a player like a mole rat bro. He literally hit the player in the only spot he could ,which as many people have pointed out, makes this rule impossible. Yellow would have been fair...
Foster does not own any guns.. he is a damp- squib..
The guy over the ball had his head 250mm off the ground how is anyone going to get under that?
It’s getting ridiculous- the Japanese player never even appear fazed by the clearout / highlighting it could not of been on the head or neck - the guy didn’t flinch
Erroneous reasoning: can't base a decision (or worse the dreaded word "intention"--Fozzy wouldn't know an "intention" if it slipped into his morning tea) on outcomes.