We value your privacy

We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data, such as unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalised ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights, as well as to develop and improve products.

With your permission we and our partners may use precise geolocation. You may click to consent to our and our partners’ processing as described above. Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing.

More Options

Wed 9 Apr 2014 | 08:14
Jared Payne banned for two weeks after red card challenge on Alex Goode

59
Comments

Today Jared Payne was suspended for two weeks for the dangerous challenge he was red carded for against Saracens. Payne was sent off by referee Jerome Garces after just four minutes of the Heineken Cup Quarter Final.

Ulster stayed in the match despite being down to 14 men, and came within points of victory but will no doubt feel aggrieved to have been in that situation in the first place.

Referee Garces has come under harsh criticism for his decision to send off Payne, who along with captain Johann Muller, pleaded that he had his eyes on the ball in an attempt to compete for it.

Payne will faced a disciplinary hearing today, charged with the contravention of Law 10.4(g) and Law 10.4(i). The former is for Dangerous charging or knocking down an opponent with the ball, and the latter for Tackling, tapping, pushing or pulling an opponent jumping for the ball in open play.

Opinions have been mixed as to whether it was the correct decision to show red or not. Some say it should be treated like a tip tackle and that he was reckless, while others feel that his eyes were on the ball and Goode simply came off second best in what could be viewed as an unfortunate collision.

Players are however responsible for the well-being of the opposition both when tackling and when contesting a high ball. By not getting off the ground, Payne put Goode (as well as himself) in a dangerous situation, and this is clearly the way Garces viewed it.

You can view highlights from this match, as well as other quarter final highlights, here.

UPDATE: This article has been updated to reflect the outcome of the disciplinary hearing in Dublin, where Payne was earlier suspended for two weeks.

Judicial Officer Simon Thomas (Wales) determined that Payne had committed a reckless act and concluded that the offence was at the low end of the IRB sanctions for offences of this nature and selected three weeks as the appropriate entry point.

As there were no aggravating factors, and taking into account the player's clean disciplinary record and his exemplary conduct at the hearing, the Judicial Officer reduced the sanction by the maximum of one (1) week and imposed a suspension of two (2) weeks.

He commented that the case had been a particularly challenging one and conveyed his thanks to the Ulster Rugby representatives for the quality of their defence during the hearing.

Posted By: Grant Constable

59 Comments

  • drg
    11:25 PM 17/04/2014

    Says 'rules' instead of 'laws' therefore comment is null and void...

  • sportsfan1
    10:58 AM 13/04/2014

    For me this isn't a red. I'd give a yellow as there was clearly no intent but he still committed an offence. Goode's injury is totally irrelevant but i feel the that the ref has taken that into account when making his decision.

  • chilldoubt
    11:51 PM 12/04/2014

    If that's a red card offence then jumping to catch a ball must be outlawed in the game i.e. a player must have at least one foot on the floor when catching a ball.
    It's the only way to prevent accidental collisions when two players are attempting to catch the ball and clearly have their eys on it and nothing else.
    Goode could just have easily caught Payne in the face with a knee, so where does it end?
    That was never a red card, Payne showed no intent other than catching the ball.
    As I say, the only way to avoid it is to stop players jumping with both feet off the floor when catching a high ball.

  • larry
    2:01 AM 11/04/2014

    Banning kicking in one's own half? Might as well turn rugby into American football then. I laugh when I read comments that teams used to kick away possession so much in the past. With less kicking now there's more tackling, less rucking, static play, and a game that looks more and more like rugby league than rugby union. Barry John wouldn't approve of that suggestion, one of the best tactical kickers the game ever saw. And no one grubber kicks like he could anymore. I'd suggest that using all forms of kicking tactically and correctly could really put defenses under pressure, and they wouldn't be charging up so fast in defense, opening up some gaps that seem to be non-existent in so many first class matches. It's bad enough defensive rucking doesn't happen anymore and that defensive forwards clutter up the mid-field instead.

  • drg
    9:16 PM 10/04/2014

    Wasn't the last lot just the Welsh Lions anyway??

  • drg
    9:12 PM 10/04/2014

    Don't want to dive too deep into this little disagreement, but is 'Saffie' really Australian? Sounds more like the word 'Saffa' to me, which smacks 'South African'...

  • reality
    8:44 PM 10/04/2014

    You can say it could have paralysed him for life but the fact of the matter is that it was an accident, and accidents happen. High tackles can break people's necks but it doesn't mean they should all result in an automatic red card. Spear tackles should be red cards because you if you spear someone it's not by accident, but getting the same punishment for a clumsy clash due to a lack of spatial awareness?

    People complain all the time about punishments in rugby being completely hypocritical and that's exactly the case here. There are links to other videos of people doing the same or worse and getting penalised and nothing more and nobody making any fuss about it.

    And if that's the way you see it, why wasn't Mouritz Botha red-carded when he took out a player in the lineout? That player could have landed badly and been paralysed but Botha got penalised and nothing more. Does that not seem a bit hypocritical to you?

    And saying that an accidental clash like this is more deserving of punishment than eye-gouging someone or stamping on someone's head is really just horrible. Do you really think that a yellow card in this case wouldn't be enough of a deterrent for players to avoid purposefully doing what Payne did? Do you think that in the absence of red cards they'd all start taking everyone out in the air knowing that they'll only get yellow?

    Look at the other videos of players being taken out in the air and ask yourself if red cards in those situations would have been appropriate or wildly exaggerated punishments.

  • matt
    8:13 PM 10/04/2014

    Unfortunately, Goode. He put himself in a position where he was vulnerable. Payne has his arms ready to catch the ball, but collides with goode first, so was trying to contest it.

  • aidy668
    6:08 PM 10/04/2014

    yeah we have seen Aussie aggression too many times especially when your losing, or as in 2001 lions tour a player who knows he is not going to get in the test side deliberately injuring a player as Mcrae did to R.O'Gara with a completely over the top and unprovoked attack! As for us "pommies" whinging we are amateurs compared with aussies!!!!.....

  • aidy668
    6:01 PM 10/04/2014

    possession of the ball in the air - which Goode had - does in fact call 'shotgun' as you cannot tackle a player who has the ball in the air you have to wait for them to land! that said I do think it seemed a little harsh as I don't think it was intentional, I think a yellow probably would have been a fairer outcome....

  • flanker2712
    4:47 PM 10/04/2014

    On the white card suggestion, I'm not sure it would have helped here. Garces saw it multiple times on the big screen and took a good 4 or 5 minutes while Goode was being treated to come to his decision (conferring with his touch judge for most of that time). I don't think an extra 5 minutes would have made any difference!

  • reality
    3:48 PM 10/04/2014

    Saying it's the same thing is a bit disrespectful to the non-British part of the Lions, but in any case, apology accepted. Just don't let it happen again.

    And I agree with you in saying that red cards shouldn't be avoided where necessary because of the time when they happen. If it's a red card in the 70th minute then it should be the same thing even in the 1st. The problem is that in spite of your claims that taking someone's legs out in the air is a red card offence, I can't actually find another example of where it resulted in a red card, and there are actually several videos on this thread which show similar offences that definitely did not result in red cards and for which the players involved weren't banned.

  • saracen
    2:56 PM 10/04/2014

    Reality, For someone with your name I think you may have missed the point. The reality is, that this tackle could have rendered the Sarries 15 paralysed for life. Eye gouging, although extremely unsavoury, rarely results in blindness. Head stamping, thankfully rare these days, or punching for that matter, usually results in concussion at worst, or a visit to medics for some stitches.
    This type of tackle needs to be stopped in order to prevent many more players ending up in spinal units.

  • 45678
    2:48 PM 10/04/2014

    you are missing my point. I'm talking about the timing of the red card, not the offence. clearly burger was a very naughty boy, however I disagree with you, taking someone's legs out in the air, intentional or not is still a red card offence.

    British & Irish Lions, British Lions, Lions - all the same to me. sorry if I upset you, you poor thing

  • saracen
    2:37 PM 10/04/2014

    Saffie, You do realise that you have simply reinforced a common perception amongst those of us who reside in the civilised world, that Aussie's are a bunch of macho racists. For your information, both teams contain players from both hemispheres. Incidentally, the old 'soft pommie' thing is a bit dated don't you think?

  • guy
    1:58 PM 10/04/2014

    With the growing concern over player wellfare it is not strange to see punishments grow more severe. The fact that penalty's/cards/suspensions weren't given before, does not mean they should never be given.

    Maybe, in light of the recent serious neck injury in the NRL, referees have received instruction to be extra strict on anything that involves risking serious neck injuries.

  • danknapp
    11:13 AM 10/04/2014

    Best comment of the thread.

  • danknapp
    11:12 AM 10/04/2014

    Do not feed the troll.

  • reality
    10:13 AM 10/04/2014

    I think the O'Mahony video shows the hypocrisy of this whole situation and many of the comments here. Harley purposefully tackles O'Mahony in the air and it was just a penalty and everyone moved on. Then in Payne's case where he accidentally takes the player out he's red-carded and people are calling for his head. I don't remember Harley being cited either and given a two-week ban.

    You're absolutely right in saying that the injury was what determined the red card and not the action itself.

    Don't forget about this one either: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCo5n1QmaoM . Penalty and no more.

  • ljnumber8
    12:10 AM 10/04/2014

    trying to arse Payne in the face - gold!

  • flanker2712
    11:47 PM 09/04/2014

    Like the time Cueto jumped to avoid getting smashed by Tulagi and ended up kicking off a bit of handbags!

  • reality
    11:34 PM 09/04/2014

    It's actually the British and Irish Lions, and I think there's a bit of a difference between eye-gouging someone and clumsily taking someone out in the air by mistake.

  • drg
    9:59 PM 09/04/2014

    A player must not tackle - ok no tackle here
    nor tap - didn't see a tap
    push or pull the foot or feet - implies arms, didn't see them being used in any way, not on the feet nor legs.

    I've never seen anything in the laws regarding using your face to make initial contact with someones arse and what the punishment would be..

    Or are they currently making an amendment to the laws:

    10.4(ii) - Tackling the jumper in the air part 2.
    A player must not occidentally run face first into the backside of another player who is jumping for the ball in a lineout or in open play. Sanction: Red card.

  • drg
    9:53 PM 09/04/2014

    Anyone see Ashton take the guy out after his try when the player jumped over him, that was a red card if ever I've seen one, the guy jumped and Ashton who didn't have eyes on the guy got up and spun him out, surely that is a red card, you cannot take a player out in the air, the fact you don't see the player doesn't matter..

    Well done for taking any competitiveness out of high balls... Good job world..

  • drg
    9:48 PM 09/04/2014

    So your solution to an accident is to apply a knee jerk reaction... Probably why you're not a professional referee.

    Oh and by the way, are you suggesting that Thom Evans who played for Scotland had his neck broken on purpose?

  • drg
    9:46 PM 09/04/2014

    It is an absolute bullshit call and further punishment.

    Matt summed it up brilliantly, 'Payne hit Goode as much as Goode hit Payne.'

    Another comment, 'he didn't even jump for the ball' ? And? It is not a requirement to take a high ball by jumping, Payne no doubt wanted to take the ball going full tilt and run it in at the other end of the pitch, by jumping he would have lost speed and probably wouldn't have made it far enough, you gauge your speed to the ball and sometimes by taking the time to jump, you reduce your overall distance and may miss the ball...

    Some have argued Payne looks down at the last moment, so that counts as 'not having eyes on the ball the whole time'.. Watch the slow motion, Payne's eyes follow exactly where the ball WOULD have been, had Goode not jumped and caught it, so my argument is that he was entirely focussed on catching the ball.

    Others have typically found fault with this tactic 'yeh, but now you can just look away and take someone out and plead you didn't see them' ... the difference in this case is I know damn well I wouldn't use my FACE to knock someone else over.

    People quoting 'you cannot tackle a player in the air', yes I totally agree, but which part of this was a tackle? When did you last tackle a player with your face?


  • drg
    9:35 PM 09/04/2014

    ahem, laws...

  • drg
    9:34 PM 09/04/2014

    Couldn't bloody well agree anymore matt, by this argument you could say Goode acted recklessly trying to arse Payne in the face which is surely an illegal move.

  • 45678
    9:25 PM 09/04/2014

    Would the same people saying that it shouldn't have been a red because it was too early in the game, give the same justification for schalk burgers gouging in the lions tour in 2009?

    I think not. It was a red card offence and bottling it would have ruined the game as it would open accusations for ulster unjustly winning the game, the same way that all of us British lions fans thought vs the springboks

  • matt
    5:03 PM 09/04/2014

    Like I said above, Payne didn't hit Goode any more than Goode hit Payne

  • matt
    5:02 PM 09/04/2014

    He didn't have time to jump for the ball, he was going flat out and got there at exactly the right moment, Goode had just stuck himself in the air at the same time. I feel bad that he got hurt, but I think that's the risk you take when you give yourself the advantage of jumping.

  • matt
    4:59 PM 09/04/2014

    Payne takes Goode out in the air about as much as Goode flying knees Payne in the chest. I don't see how the logic can be that if you launch yourself into the air you have effectively called 'shotgun' on that area of the pitch.

  • elvis15
    4:20 PM 09/04/2014

    These guys are good, good players, and if he doesn't realize he's got an opposition player who'll get under the ball before him and could likely be in the air at least 10 yards prior to contact, then the penalty/card is deserved. I might have left it to the red I guess, since he is still hoping to play the ball and it'd be insane to try and pretend to catch it in an effort at foul play - but then again, I've seen stranger things.

  • will00713
    3:46 PM 09/04/2014

    when u make contact with some one in the air these days that is a pen, when some one is off the ground and you make contact with them u have a duty of care to bring them to ground safely. although Jared Payne has eyes only for the ball he does make contact in the air - pen and does not bring the player to ground safely - red. if u make contact with some one in the air and bring them to ground safely then its just a pen.

  • flyingpepper
    3:42 PM 09/04/2014

    Check the rules. Yes a second here or there could have been okay. But that's rugby! Hit someone in the air and he lands on his head you must expect a yellow card at least. I don't always agree but when you are the guy in the air you are happy for some protection

  • flyingpepper
    3:38 PM 09/04/2014

    Yes slippery played rugby for over 20
    Years. If you hit a guy you are at fault end off. If he jumps and you don't then how are you contesting for the ball???? He then lands on his head. How is this different to spear tackle? Not much. The rfu is trying to reduce injure and this seems like a good place to start. If a player is in the air you either jump and contest or you leave him until he hits the ground. Very simple

  • flanker2712
    3:02 PM 09/04/2014

    "Keeping his eyes on the ball would also bring the jumper's arms into view and, unless he thought the catcher was a Giant, he could have pulled out and side stepped."

    You are being ironic, right?

  • thegaffer89
    2:59 PM 09/04/2014

    Agree with everything you said. It cannot be compared to a tip tackle because it is a completely different situation, and there should be differennt sets of rules for the 2 areas.

    That said, I also think any criticism of the ref is harsh as it is certainly a difficult decision. The ref's first job is player welfare and when an incident is that dangerous it is very difficult. Goode leaving on a stretcher shouldn't really effect the ref's thinking but it probably did.

    Payne should be punished for stupidity/recklessness but in no way did he mean to take Goode out or indeed injure him.

  • flanker2712
    2:57 PM 09/04/2014

    "If his eyes were on the ball he would have seen Goode in the air and tried to out jump him."

    Is this a serious comment?

  • reality
    2:48 PM 09/04/2014

    What is the law though? Does it say you're not allowed to collide with a player in the air or you're not allowed to tackle him, because this is clearly an accidental collision rather than a tackle.

    Then, does the law say that as long as you jump you can do whatever you want to the other player as long as it's in the air? I'm not sure if there is actually a ground/air difference specified in the rules, although I could very well be wrong.

    I don't know what the law is, but it seems like common sense is the thing to use here, and emotion rather than common sense seems to be what influenced the referee's decision. I've no doubt that if Goode had gotten up and walked away the referee would have given Payne a yellow card, and as someone mentioned, if it took 5 minutes of replays to determine the punishment then it obviously wasn't a clear red card.

  • eddie-g
    2:23 PM 09/04/2014

    Opinions have been mixed because people don't all know what the laws say. When it comes to collisions with players who are in the air, intent does not need to be considered. If the ref thinks you were reckless, it is a red card offence.

    This law was drafted as it is to deal precisely with the situation where you have an "opponent jumping for the ball in open play". The fact Goode went off on a strecher should not have mattered in terms of the ref's decision, but it should certainly explain to anyone not already aware why this law is on the books. These are potentially very dangerous incidents, and the law puts the onus on the chasing player to avoid them.

    No idea what sort of ban might come out of this - they may want to make an example of the incident, or they may decide the red at the time went most of the way as sufficient punishment - but hopefully what it will underline is that Garces' decision was correct. The ref applied the law here, he does not deserve the stick he's gotten from some quarters.

  • 2:15 PM 09/04/2014

    see ya! 'ref! ref!i had my eye on an object about 500g, 30cm long and couldn't see the 5'11'' and 95kg man air borne beside it...honest!' yeah, that seems a good defence....

  • moddeur
    2:11 PM 09/04/2014

    When I barge into a ruck, I generally look at where my studs land. I don't think any referee would allow me to walk all over someone's face and argue for my defence that my eyes were on the ball the whole time.

  • s_conner
    1:57 PM 09/04/2014

    If Payne (a full back) thought he could just catch the ball without jumping and/or a contest then he's a fool. Where did he think his opposite number was likely to be?!?! IMO it's a reckless collision, but intent or no, it's still Payne's (and everyone's) responsibility to take more care in scenarios like this.

    He should've kept in line with his other chasers!!!

  • colombes
    1:29 PM 09/04/2014

    No discussion on the red card, regarding Payne took Goode in the air, the fall on the head and the fact Goode can't play again.

    On a ban, the erc will be only judge

  • reality
    1:11 PM 09/04/2014

    Regardless of whether or not it deserved a red card, has anyone ever actually seen a red card given for this before, or is this the first case? If it's the first case, then why?

    It's an unfortunate accident, but that's all it is, so I think giving the same punishment for this as for eye-gouging, head-stamping and punching is a bit much.

  • browner
    12:56 PM 09/04/2014

    Nothing in pro rugby happens by chance
    4 minutes in ....!!
    if this isnt sanctioned heavily it will give a green light for players to run through/back into opposition jumpers without punishment.
    And that will be d a n g e r o u s for all players in all levels of the game.

  • themull
    12:51 PM 09/04/2014

    All you people calling for reds for this challenge? Would you also call for reds for guys grabbing players who are lifted in the lineouts before they hit the ground..Essentially the same thing (tackling a player while in the air) but in that scenario it is completely intentional..



  • fellwalker
    12:49 PM 09/04/2014

    If his eyes were on the ball he would have seen Goode in the air and tried to out jump him. He didn't. So he took him out in the air illegally. Having his eyes on the ball is a nonsense. Any offence could be committed and let off - honest ref I was looking at the ball. Red card yes; ban?

  • pantxo
    12:48 PM 09/04/2014

    Having his eyes on the ball is irrelevant. Fould play is a matter of fact and it has to be dealt with.

    YOU MAY NOT TACKLE A PLAYER WHO IS IN THE AIR.

    Might have gotten a yellow if Goode had not left on a stretcher.

  • pantxo
    12:48 PM 09/04/2014

    Having his eyes on the ball is irrelevant. Fould play is a matter of fact and it has to be dealt with.

    YOU MAY NOT TACKLE A PLAYER WHO IS IN THE AIR.

    Might have gotten a yellow if Goode had not left on a stretcher.

  • iceypickle
    12:14 PM 09/04/2014

    From the point of view of the ref, the red card had to be given. Yes Payne had his eyes on the ball, but he still took the player out in the air, and the fact Goode landed badly just makes the challenge seem worse. If Goode had been able to walk away then maybe it would have been different. Further disciplinary action might be a bit far, but i think the ref made the right call.

  • guy
    12:08 PM 09/04/2014

    Had Payne jumped for the ball, the situation would have been different. There probably wouldn't even have been an injury. Red was justified IMHO and it was quite a brave decision by the official. Not sure he should have a further ban.

  • deminboy
    12:03 PM 09/04/2014

    On what grounds is it clearly a red and a ban? If you are going to be making allegations like that at least have some evidence backing it up. Clearly his eyes were on the ball the whole time and even his head smashed off the guys butt when he was in the air..

  • flyingpepper
    12:02 PM 09/04/2014

    Sorry eyes on ball

  • flyingpepper
    12:02 PM 09/04/2014

    Where is the debate?!? Taken out in the air and he lands on his head. If he only has eyes on the Bacall he knows Goode is in the air and would know he isn't. Hard to see how he saw a different outcome from the way he approach the collision

  • welshosprey
    11:45 AM 09/04/2014

    Clearly a red and a ban.

  • crsk
    11:20 AM 09/04/2014

    Payne only has eyes for the ball. As far as he is concerned, Goode isn't challenging for it. It's an unfortunate collision, any further punishment is excessive IMO.

  • crsk
    11:20 AM 09/04/2014

    Payne only has eyes for the ball. As far as he is concerned, Goode isn't challenging for it. It's an unfortunate collision, any further punishment is excessive IMO.

Related Articles