Comments on: Poll: Did Jared Payne deserve to see red?

By: Don P

Don P — Fri, 11 Apr 2014 15:41:20 +0000

Cug

I think you need Specsavers. If you watch the incident again, you ought to see that JP had eyes for the ball c10 yds before contact.

As per my prev comments, why would he deliberately or ‘recklessly’ run into a competitor? Doesn’t make sense.

By: Don P

Don P — Fri, 11 Apr 2014 15:34:58 +0000

Eugene Murphy, Jonny

Gr8 article as far as this site is concerned. Getting more mileage than a Dunlop tyre.

Interestingly Jonathan kaplan & Stuart Barnes disagreed with the red card.

Whether they were both in the air, grounded or as in this case 1 or each, surely competeing for the ball is the whole pt of rugby innit? I believe both players competed for the ball (watch the replay c10 yds before contact & see that both players’ sets of eyes were on the ball) & the fact that Goode got there 1st, marginally before Payne, is purely incidental.

Playing the Devil’s advocado here, it could be perversly argued that Goode recklessly jumped into & (altho inadvertinetly) ‘attacked’ Payne’s head area, therefore constituting dangerous play… warrenting a, er, red card?

Again, I’ve been lax & still not read the tackle law, but as both playeres, IMO, were rightly competing for the ball, a red was likely down to the ref’s interp of an unfortunate injury?

If we want the competative element taken out of rugby, then maybe we could all watch tidley winks… or soccer, & see players rolling about (as Payne easliy could have done) to sway a suspect ref?

Nxt? Ah, I’m pooped.

By: Jonny

Jonny — Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:24:31 +0000

The difference is that Goode was in the air and Payne was not. If both had been in the air, I would imagine no card would be given, as it can be seen that both are looking to win the ball.

As Payne did not jump, he cannot claim that he is competing against someone who has chosen to jump. As he is not competing, he is therefore liable for any contact he makes with the airborne player.

Later in the game, Farrell and Marshall (I think) both “competed” for a high ball, by both jumping, no cards given.

2 players both on the ground collide, when it is clear both are looking at the ball, no card.

By: Cug

Cug — Thu, 10 Apr 2014 02:42:23 +0000

Eyes on the ball and reckless sum it up BUT which was the telling factor. Eyes on the ball only to that moment when he realised he was beaten for the ball but he went on anyway making it reckless with the player in the air. Perhaps he was hoping for the ball to be dropped – or was hoping to force that outcome – in that split second of taking the decision.

By: Eugene Murphy

Eugene Murphy — Wed, 09 Apr 2014 21:07:16 +0000

I agree with you totally Don P. What if the two players had collided without either jumping and both injured? Send both off? Perhaps we should expect both to opt out of attempting a catch for fear of accidentally colliding with an opponent!

By: Don P

Don P — Wed, 09 Apr 2014 12:58:36 +0000

Don’t you like Payne? You seem to have it in for him.

Does the guy have a history of ‘idiocy’ or foul play? And why would he deliberately run into Goode whilst the latter was in the air? To get a red card on purpose & put his side at, as it turned out, a losing disadvantage? I don’t think so. Besides Payne was honest enough not to make out that he was hurt (which he could easily have been) in the (likely accidental) collision.

It isn’t as black & white as you want it to be.

By: SY

SY — Tue, 08 Apr 2014 23:00:02 +0000

When did thinking stop being a part of the game?

By: SY

SY — Tue, 08 Apr 2014 22:58:46 +0000

The purpose of the law is to protect the player jumping for the ball because it’s extremely dangerous to be tackled in the air. Payne tackled Goode in the air.

“how is an opposing player traveling at full speed supposed to stop.” Have the awareness to know they can’t win the ball that way. It would have been a lot easier if Payne let Goode come down with the ball and try to create a turnover after the tackle.

By: SY

SY — Tue, 08 Apr 2014 22:48:36 +0000

Payne never jumped to challenge the ball. He just ran into Goode.

By: Brian

Brian — Tue, 08 Apr 2014 20:56:03 +0000

Don’t know how badly injured Goode was, guess we will see when he’s next selected, however it was very fortuitous for Saracens to play almost the entire game with advantage of an extra man.
It appears to be a tactic in the game to jump as high in the air and keep your legs in the air for as long as possible in order to draw the penalty. Alex Goode jumped so high and travelled so far forward that he collided with Payne’s chest and head. Surely there must be a degree of recklessness in leaping into the air, whilst traveling in a forward direction without regard to your own safety, how is an opposing player traveling at full speed supposed to stop. Surely it would be wise to make this leaping in the air whilst in travelling an offence, it would certainly cut down on injuries, as well as yellow, and when the referee falls for it red cards.

By: Eugene Murphy

Eugene Murphy — Tue, 08 Apr 2014 20:10:38 +0000

What is reckless about watching the flight of a ball in the air and jumping to challenge for it? He never took his eyes of the ball. Will we encourage players to opt out of challenges? If Payne had jumped higher and both had collided then what would the ref have done, sent both off?

By: SY

SY — Tue, 08 Apr 2014 20:04:01 +0000

Payne didn’t contest the ball in the air, he just ran into Goode who won the ball. That’s not commitment or passion, it’s stupidity. Payne was better off letting Goode come to ground, make the tackle, and try to create a turnover.

Again, the fact that Payne could have injured himself shows the degree of his recklessness.