: Tue Mar 03, 2009 1:09 pm  

piemandan wrote:

Not sure he did to be honest, type this into a famous video site;

World Club Challenge - Anthony Watmough Big Hit on Rob Burrow

He smothered Burrow, nothing more, nothing less.

Yes I really must do that because obviously the quality of those images will be several times greater than my 1080i High Definition version courtesy of Sky Sports.

Hollywood Harrigan wrote:

He didnt jump, he didnt swing and he main contact was with the shoulder. Burrow was also leaning back which probably made him 5'2.

Thanks for telling us what he didn't do although I don't think what he didn't do is the issue here. Watmough's right bicep clearly collects Burrow above the shoulder. That is what made the tackle illegal and rightly resulted in a penalty to Leeds.

Hollywood Harrigan wrote:

What is Watmough supposed to do in that situation?

He is supposed to hit the player (no matter how big or how small) legally ie shoulder and below. This he failed to do and was rightly penalised.

: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:52 pm  

tvoc wrote:

Thanks for telling us what he didn't do although I don't think what he didn't do is the issue here. Watmough's right bicep clearly collects Burrow above the shoulder. That is what made the tackle illegal and rightly resulted in a penalty to Leeds.

So in other words, no different to the SBW hit on Marcus Bai that had various retards on here proclaiming him to be the hardest man on the planet then?

: Tue Mar 03, 2009 3:59 pm  

tvoc wrote:

Yes I really must do that because obviously the quality of those images will be several times greater than my 1080i High Definition version courtesy of Sky Sports.

Thanks for telling us what he didn't do although I don't think what he didn't do is the issue here. Watmough's right bicep clearly collects Burrow above the shoulder. That is what made the tackle illegal and rightly resulted in a penalty to Leeds.

He is supposed to hit the player (no matter how big or how small) legally ie shoulder and below. This he failed to do and was rightly penalised.

I thought Sky only broadcast in 720p?

Burrow's biggest asset is also his biggest problem. If you look at that tackle (in any resolution) Burrow's knees are bent and he's leaning over quite a lot when the tackler hits him. Being as he's only 5'5" standing straight up his head must be between about 4' and 4'6" off the ground when the tackler hit him so quite difficult to miss for a big guy.

The other thing about Burrow getting hit in the head (but not this time) is that his main way of avoiding tackles is to duck under them. He can't be too surprised then when he smacked in the melon can he?

: Tue Mar 03, 2009 4:01 pm  

Could you draw my attention to the section of the RFL rule book that makes tackling a player around the head acceptable is he is below a certain height or bent in a certain position?

TIA.

: Tue Mar 03, 2009 4:26 pm  

Harry Pinner wrote:

I thought Sky only broadcast in 720p?

My TV very kindly tells me the quality of the input signal from my Sky HD box when I change channel (when viewing through the HDMI connection.) It says 1080i but I suppose it could be lying to me. Either way still better than whatever 'You Tube' manage to output into my pc, which at times leaves a lot to be desired.

Harry Pinner wrote:

Burrow's biggest asset is also his biggest problem. If you look at that tackle (in any resolution) Burrow's knees are bent and he's leaning over quite a lot when the tackler hits him. Being as he's only 5'5" standing straight up his head must be between about 4' and 4'6" off the ground when the tackler hit him so quite difficult to miss for a big guy.

The other thing about Burrow getting hit in the head (but not this time) is that his main way of avoiding tackles is to duck under them. He can't be too surprised then when he smacked in the melon can he?

It's not a matter of whether he or you or I are surprised when he get's hit high it's whether the law regarding what constitutes a legal and illegal tackle applies to all players irrespective of a player's height.

I would suggest it does. And you?

Watmough's right bicep clearly contacts Burrow above the shoulder and it was a penalty to Leeds just the same as it would have been had Peacock been on the receiving end.

: Tue Mar 03, 2009 4:34 pm  

Only just seen it. He's flying towards Burrow before the ball is even thrown to him. Rubbish throw by Peacock and he shouldn't have passed to him anyway.

I'm blame Peacock personally for us losing that game

: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:06 pm  

burrow tried too duck under like a little munschin

: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:32 pm  

Nothing wrong with it, contact witch shoulder, appalling decision from the ref.

: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:34 pm  

tvoc wrote:

It's not a matter of whether he or you or I are surprised when he get's hit high it's whether the law regarding what constitutes a legal and illegal tackle applies to all players irrespective of a player's height.

I would suggest it does. And you?

I'd suggest that teams employ a midget who would therefore be more or less untackleable unless the defence was prepared to lie down and risk being penalised for trip.

: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:43 pm  

Harry Pinner wrote:

I'd suggest that teams employ a midget who would therefore be more or less untackleable unless the defence was prepared to lie down and risk being penalised for trip.

It's odd that Leeds' fans don't have an issue with Burrow's height.