Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

All Blacks captain Kieran Read in the gun for neck tackle against Springboks

Kieran Read. (Photo by Hannah Peters/Getty Images)

NZ Herald

A South African rugby critic is turning the heat on All Blacks captain Kieran Read, accusing him of a “clear professional foul around the neck”.

But it’s brought a divided reaction from Springbok fans, some of whom say it paints them as bad losers. One points out that the Springboks got away with high tackles on Ardie Savea.

Journalist Brenden Nel, who has a strong Twitter following, has questioned why World Rugby didn’t cite Read from the lineout incident in the opening game at Yokohama.

https://twitter.com/BrendenNel/status/1175777871450779648

In the 45th minute, Springbok flanker Pieter-Steph du Toit attempts to tackle halfback Aaron Smith after the All Blacks win a lineout.

ADVERTISEMENT

But Read impedes du Toit with a coat hanger type tackle around the neck area, with the big Springboks flanker ending up on the deck.

Kieran Read takes Pieter-Steph du Toit around the neck during the All Blacks’ 23-13 win over the Springboks. (Photo / NZ Herald)

“Wonder what the All Blacks say about this?,” tweets Nel.

“Probably just bury their heads in the sand. It’s their All Blacks after all.”

But a Springbok supporter reckoned there were neck high tackles on All Black Ardie Savea that went unpunished in the match controlled by Frenchman Jerome Garces.

“Doing this just makes us look like bad losers. Stop playing the victim,” the supporter tells Nel, a former Supersport rugby editor.

Another fan attacked Nel for an “All Black hating narrative”, but Nel also had supporters.

https://twitter.com/ChampStrategy/status/1175848660573274113

This article first appeared on nzherald.co.nz and was republished with permission.

RugbyPass on the ground ahead of Ireland v Scotland:

Video Spacer

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 10 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Well I was mainly referring to my thinking about the split, which was essentially each /3 rounded up, but reliant on WCs to add buffer.


You may have been going for just a 16 team league ranking cup?


But yes, those were just ideas for how to select WCs, all very arbitrary but I think more interesting in ways than just going down a list (say like fl's) of who is next in line. Indeed in my reply to you I hinted at say the 'URC' WC spot actually being given to the Ireland pool and taken away from the Welsh pool.


It's easy to think that is excluding, and making it even harder on, a poor performing country, but this is all in context of a 18 or 20 team comp where URC (at least to those teams in the URC) got 6 places, which Wales has one side lingering around, and you'd expect should make. Imagine the spice in that 6N game with Italy, or any other of the URC members though! Everyone talks about SA joining the 6N, so not sure it will be a problem, but it would be a fairly minor one imo.


But that's a structure of the leagues were instead of thinking how to get in at the top, I started from the bottom and thought that it best those teams doing qualify for anything. Then I thought the two comps should be identical in structure. So that's were an even split comes in with creating numbers, and the 'UEFA' model you suggest using in some manner, I thought could be used for the WC's (5 in my 20 team comp) instead of those ideas of mine you pointed out.


I see Jones has waded in like his normal self when it comes to SH teams. One thing I really like about his idea is the name change to the two competitions, to Cup and Shield. Oh, and home and away matches.

41 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Yes I was the one who suggested to use a UEFA style point. And I guessed, that based on the last 5 years we should start with 6 top14, 6 URC and 4 Prem."

Yes I am aware that you suggested it, but you then went on to say that we should initially start with a balance that clearly wasn't derived from that system. I'm not a mind reader, so how was I to work out that you'd arrived at that balance by dint of completely having failed to remember the history of the competition.


"Again, I was the one suggesting that, but you didn't like the outcome of that."

I have no issues with the outcome of that, I had an issue with a completely random allocation of teams that you plucked out of thin air.

Interestingly its you who now seem to be renouncing the UEFA style points system, because you don't like the outcome of reducing URC representation.


"4 teams for Top14, URC and Prem, 3 teams for other leagues and the last winner, what do you think?"

What about 4 each + 4 to the best performing teams in last years competition not to have otherwise qualified? Or what about a UEFA style system where places are allocated to leagues on the basis of their performance in previous years' competitions?

There's no point including Black Lion if they're just going to get whitewashed every year, which I think would be a possibility. At most I'd support 1 team from the Rugby Europe Super Cup, or the Russian Championship being included. Maybe the best placed non-Israeli team and the Russian winners could play off every year for the spot? But honestly I think its best if they stay limited to the Challenge Cup for now.

41 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Stuart Lancaster 'wants out' of Racing 92 and eyeing Euro giants job Stuart Lancaster 'wants out' of Racing 92 and eyeing Euro giants job
Search