Clive Woodward settles debate over England's red card

I fail to see why England, under Eddie insist on continuing with the power game.

Then wonder why the players tackle high and receive sanctions.

How does the 10 fit into this power game mix?

Harry

I certainly agree that the subject of 'intent' needs to be debated further.

The so called 'smother tackle' arrived with the learning from Rugby league defence so as to prevent the ball being passed, as such it is not going to go away.

My biggest concern is referred to by Jonny Wilkinson. By removing one player for whatever reason the fatigue levels near the end of the game for the remaining 14 (or possibly even 13 as in the Scottish game) are high and with it the risk of injury increases especially as the opposition will bring on fresh powerful players for that later period. Errors in decision making, inability to recover quickly and desperation are all evident in these situations. Further head clashes and other injuries become more likely.

If we look at the England / Scotland game, a deliberate palm into touch (not dangerous at all) led to the triple jeopardy of a man sent off plus a penalty try plus a reduction to 13 men. The neck roll (a dangerous form of clear out) committed by a Scottish player shortly afterwards generated only a penalty. All according to the rules. But have we got them right?

Finally, thousands of people have paid considerable sums of money to watch a fair, balanced contest.

Perhaps one suggestion could be that for internationals (or for all matches) the offending player leaves the field permanently. After 10 or 20 minutes a replacement could be brought on to re-balance the teams and reduce the likelihood of more injury.

Lack of self discipline by the players (see also Bath v Bristol the other weekend). This was discussed in the panel after the Bath game- you cannot go in to tackle where contact head to head or shoulder to head is likely. It is that simple- keep the tackles below the armpits. It doesnt do your team any good to be one man down, especially at this top level of rugby,

The whole red card business is a complete mess. Are we really suggesting that, in a split second, Charlie Ewells - or whoever it might be - should conduct a debate with himself along the lines of: Now, wait a minute. I can’t tackle this bloke, who is coming at me at a rate of knots, in this way so I’d better do something else?

In short, natural instincts have been ruled out of the game. The injury was unfortunate but, on these platforms, people have gone through the footage with a fine tooth comb and found that, so it seems, virtually every physical contact is a red card.

In other circumstances, when fists fly, commentators and the like label these incidents ‘handbags’ but fists are definitely against the law, whether they are thrown before or after a whistle.

Compare the incident involving James Ryan with the one in which Josh Adams was up-ended and thrown to the ground. This, and I mean THIS, was a deliberate act of foul play - not an accidental collision - and it resulted in a penalty only. Explain.

Seems to me that the quality of tackling is poor.

The upper body smother type tackle is ineffective and increases the risk of head injuries.

The traditional tackle of contacting the thigh reduces the effectiveness of the fend, is clear of the head and the tackled player usually hits the deck quickly for the secondary phase.

Daniel Carter and Conrad Smith were experts at the tackle, and present players like Ritchie Mounga continue the tradition.

treating this one as semi-final game such a joke. this team won't be anywhere near a semifinal in the world cup 2023. dream on jones...a Red card from a low pressure tackle. nowhere near the 22 or a contested catch.. poor selection.