Rugby videos of tackles, tries, funny incidents and more: Young Calum Clark red carded for a head butt

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Young Calum Clark red carded for a head butt - JWC

Young England flank Calum Clark let himself and his team mates down on Sunday as he was red carded for a head butt in the final of the Junior World Championship against the junior All Blacks in Swansea.

Clark, who at 18 became the youngest forward to start a Guinness Premiership match when he made his debut for Leeds Carnegie last year, has been part of the Leeds Academy system since he was 14, and is regarded as an up and coming star of the English game.

He did his reputation no good on the weekend though, as after already having been penalised and spoken to earlier on for foul play, he decided that with 15 minutes left in the game and his team down by 20, it was necessary to fly into a maul, leading with the head, ala Epi Taione.

The red card ensued, and Clark marched off thinking he’d done nothing wrong, despite making contact with the New Zealand player's head not once, but twice.

After not having seen much of Clark in action, incidents like this do very little towards gaining respect for a young man who, more than likely, has a lot of talent and potential. Rugby isn't a popularity contest, but a man's character and the first impression goes a long way towards cementing a fanbase and gaining widespread recognition. The reaction from him, considering his age, was pretty appalling too.

Let's hope in the future we see more of this highly regarded youngster, but for all the right reasons.

New Zealand went on to win 38-3 and lift the inaugural Junior World Championship trophy. We’ll try get some of the best tries from the game up on here soon.

in this game there was a hug and massive hit by the number 6 of new zealand crushing number 15 of england.that tackle has category enough to be in this marvelous blog.

By Anonymous, at June 25, 2008 11:40 pm
^ make a note of the time in future please, as we aren't always able to spot everything that happens. cheers

By GMC, at June 25, 2008 11:42 pm
obviously the linesman decided he wanted some camera action!
the swinging arms were worse than the 'head butt', he just ran at the back of the ruck! dont really understand how players can punch each other in the face then practically always get away with a yellow, then this happens n he gets a red! may as well start supporting football now

By Anonymous, at June 25, 2008 11:43 pm
Come on, Anonymous. He clearly lined the guy up and leaped over the player in front of him in order to drive his head into the face of the opponent. This could be criminally actionable beyond the field of play, since it's a clear intent to injure. The red card should be followed by a hefty suspension.

By Anonymous, at June 25, 2008 11:48 pm
hes an idiot

By Anonymous, at June 25, 2008 11:50 pm
hefty suspension! firstly i dont think he will be playing much seeing as the seasons over, secondly thats a massive over reaction. the guy who got hit in the face barely seemed bothered, it wasnt like the taione butt where a massive contact was made. i definately think it should have been a yellow, just think that the ref called it because it looked aggressive not because it was seriously bad.
ref, if you watch rugby and examine what could be deemed off the field as 'criminally actionable', your gonna have alot to complain about.
i would also like to know how a headbutt which is stupid, clumsy but makes little contact, warrants more than the majority of punches and spear tackle?

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:01 am
What could he *honestly* have achieved with that even if he got away with that? It's not like they'd give his team 30 points for it

By Unknown, at June 26, 2008 12:01 am
Anonymous come on m8 you got to be joking

By Joe, at June 26, 2008 12:06 am
if you watch and listen carefully, you'll see Clark go in with the head while the ref tells him to watch his head

instead Clark lines the NZ player and head butts him

because of his earlier offense and the seriousness of the head butt, there really was no chance of a yellow IMO

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:08 am
everyone says you must be jokin, but nobody seems to answer how this is worse than a spear tackle or a punch. spear tackles can break peoples spines, or potentially kill people. punches can also do some pretty serious damage. a headbutt with no force behind it does no damage, yet everyone screams red card. dont you think the player being butted or his team mates would have reacted if it had been that bad?
what exactly are we supposed to be blaming on the english btw?
i presume you are french, have you never watch the t14 fights on here? pot kettle

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:14 am
//what else would you expect from an english player?//

That's more disgusting than what this kid has done.. I'm English and know exactly how disgraceful and utterly stupid Calum Clark was but I wouldn't suggest that irresponsible actions like these could represent a whole nation of rugby players..

Such ignorance shouldn't be tolerated in any sport, let alone Rugby..

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:31 am
Anonymous - Firstly, using a name will mean you have a much higher chance of having your comments remain on here and not be deleted.

Secondly, you're helluva defensive there. This has nothing to do with English or French, this is about one player and his foolish act.

It's more about intent than the result. Headbutting shows intent to harm, whereas most spear tackles are accidental and clumsy.

Punches, well, they normally are and should be red or yellow cards. But taking this players first incident into account, combined with the second, that my friend is why it's a red card. Good decision too I feel.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:33 am
here we go then heres a name for you! firstly if somebody makes a racial slur against the english then something should be said really, i was reacting to that, not that that concerns you anyway. secondly lifting someone into the air and dropping them on their head happens by accident? probably every now and again there are circumstances, but its usually a desire to hurt the other player. what annoys me is that things like this, along with things such as stamping, get a massive over reaction from over keen refs. both things that he did had intent to them, although both did absolutely no harm. this is exactly the same as a punch that doesnt quite make contact, yet still deserves a yellow. calum clark was clearly being over aggressive and frustrated. being aggressive is not enough reason to send somebody off tho. the ref said dont use the head the first time and didnt blow straight away, which suggests the ref reacted because of the aggression shown. aggression and stupidity my friend dont warrant a red card, causing somebody actually damage should.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:49 am
You can't head-butt in boxing, and thats a clear statement there of the seriousness of it.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:00 am
you cant tackle people in boxing either. no relevance

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:02 am
spear tackles dont always cause permanent damage, but they are cracked down upon because they have the potential to be very dangerous. the same is true with a headbutt, where the clear intent is to hurt. he is gaining nothing for the team by doing it, merely risking injury to another player. as the commentator said, rugby is a game of self discipline, and what clarke did was a disgrace. combined with the previous stuff, he deserves a red without question. if you notice, he also goes in with his head in the first ruck but it isnt really noticed

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:03 am
stephanie, this 'actual damage' argument you are using is ridiculous. it's the intent that is key here.
a dangerous tackle is usually an exaggeration of a legal tackle - where the tackler goes too high or doesn't bring the other player down safely. both of these offences are punishable by a yellow or red card depending on the referee's interpretation of the offenders intent and whether he has been previously warned.
a deliberate head-butt is nothing to do with rugby - NOTHING. the referee gives Clarke the benefit of the doubt that the initial headbutt may be an accidental by-product of him aggressively joining the maul. he is rightly therfore warned first. he then repeats the offence which blatantly shows he is deliberately trying to head-butt the nz player and as a result he is rightly sent off.
as for your argument about punches, they are almost always red cards these days. I don't understand why you say they 'practically always get away with a yellow'. thjis is basically just untrue. occasionally you see large brawls wherein 'punch-throwers' can escape due to the large number of players involved but often the officials will single out one or two players that have thrown punches and send them off.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:15 am
to some extent i agree with you keele, the headbutt should be cracked down on because of the POTENTIAL damage it could do, and ye he doesnt gain anything from it and its stupid. fact is its the same as throwing a punch that doesnt connect, you dont see any of those go for a red, most of the time the punches that do connect go for a yellow. i would call the tana umaga o driscoll spear tackle disgraceful, or the SA fan attacking the ref in, i think it was 95, i wouldnt class two petulant acts which caused little damage a disgrace

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:16 am
also i totally agree with will.
please lets keep the racism off rugbydump and out of rugby altogether. playful banter between nations is one thing but racism just makes people sound idiotic. any xenophobic comments should be deleted.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:20 am
That man is just stupid, and his laughing attitude after being red carded is disgusting. The man just can't control himself, he's a total idiot, even if he's young there's no excuse.

Le Clairvoyant

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:25 am
ok so the recent baa baas game against ireland, neither of the punches thrown in that game were punished, although this was probably because its a baa baas game n the ref or linesman may have let it go. fabian pelous' kick during the heineken cup got a yellow, probably caused as much damage as the headbutt. im sure he intended to kick him, and kicking peoples not part of the game, so shouldnt he be sent off? felix, if you really believe there are more punches that recieve red than yellow, then go through the dirty play section and see how many red cards are actually shown. i guarantee you that acts such as this and stamping recieve far bigger sanctions than punches.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:28 am
hes got a bit of mongrel in him i like that...nothing wrong with a bit of agro

but unfortunately if u dont learn to harness ur aggression then it definately works against you...ie this bloke.

commentators gave him a serve, but so they should, they were from england and he gave away crucial penalties in a world cup final...and the commmentators are right when they say he should be embarrased and ashamed, because if hes not he will never learn from it, and in a few years could be playing for the senior team in a world cup final and do the same thing

he lost them the game.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:54 am
okay, one issue at a time. first - this incident IS a red card offence. there cannot really be any debate about it. not just in the rule book but in practice, similar incidents are red carded. the epi taione incident is a good example of an almost identical occurance with an identical result.
http://rugbydump.blogspot.com/2008/04/epi-taione-head-butt-disgrace-against.html

second, punches should be red cards also. find me a video where someone punches someone else and i will tell you it should be a red card.

i think if they are only given warnings or yellows its often in cases where two guys are fighting each other - not one guy hitting a defenceless opponent (like clarke is doing in this instance).

third, i'm slightly frustrated that you have returned to the 'level of damage' argument. although the nz player remains on the pitch, his head clearly rocks back with the impact and he appears to have been hurt by his reaction (holding his head and grimacing etc). comparing this to the pelous kick is borderline insane. pelous is clearly just giving the guy a tap on the back side and telling him to head back over to his mates. Clarke is using his head and momentum to do deliberate damage to the nz player by impacting his jaw.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 2:02 am
jog on stephanie!

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 2:42 am
It was a red card offence - no doubt. The advent of the sin binning has been a revelation for punishing deliberate offsides etc but one bad thing to come of it is refs reluctance to send players off who punch. IMO the first offence could've been a yellow, I've been binned for less!

Actual infliction of injury is no measure for whether or not yellows/reds should be given - its all about intent.

By Unknown, at June 26, 2008 2:46 am
I hate this type of stuff, such a cheap shot. Ban for life for being an idiot.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 2:49 am
Wot a muppet. Their was no need for it. on the seriousness of headbutting, it is a purly agressive act, a swinging arm can be seen as a defensive action, were as a headbutt is very agressive. You don't headbutt someone to stop them grabing you or punching you because they will hit you in your exposed head. People start fights with headbutts

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 3:00 am
I think the intention of hurting is just as bad as actually hurting and thats why he got the red

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 4:04 am
We all know that rugby is a contact sport. But if you're heading down the path of the universal cheap shot, at least be smart enough to be subtle.

...And try not to leave your team mates short handed for the rest of the game (in this case against the best age grade team in the world).

What a tosser.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:37 am
maybe if he just walked away with an angry face he might get away with being labelled a "loose cannon hard man" ....but....he doesn't...and that smile on his face as he walks away makes him a "donkeys anus!"

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:52 am
in the words of the commentator,,."Utterly stupid"

By Don, at June 26, 2008 6:53 am
Just completely undisciplined behaviour from the flanker. I play A grade 14s and nothing like that has ever happend in my team.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 8:07 am
Those were some really dumb penalties commited on his part. If wanted to fight I think the UFC is coming to the UK, I'm sure there's a lightweight fighter that'd be more than happy to make short work of this pom. Talk juice not being worth the squeeze.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 8:40 am
he is such an idiot.. he already was yellow carded for the swinging arm and then he lets his team down and goes and headbutts.. maybe he had already given up hope on winning the match and just wanted to injure people which just speaks volume about his lousy character.. and why is there even talk about his head butt not injuring the nz no 8. penalizing the offense shldnt be based on how badly injured the victim is. thats total bullshit.. it just be about the intent to injure.. and he was already warned.. definately a red..

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 10:16 am
Silly little boy really - not only did he let himself down but also his team - He should go to WWE if he wants to do that instead of playing rugby...

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 10:48 am
i hope that d**khe*d reads these comments...he had no reason to do that..i'm not ashamed of the fact that we lost, they were the better team by far, but the fact that the no. 7 did such a pathetic, childish and immature action. Thats the kind of childs play you expect from a bunch of chavs, NOT a rugby player. He deserves to be suspended so he can learn how much of a moron he is.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 10:54 am
love the commentators

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 10:58 am
I think everyone who has played the game has had a "red mist" moment, that is forgiveable it his attitude when walking off which is the tragic part in this. He just doesnt seem to care, I really hope this is not a sign of things to come with young pros. I grew up in the valleys and some games were brutal but to get sent off was a real disgrace.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 11:21 am
the bottom line is that he looks like a twat, and just seems to have the completely wrong attitude.
his reaction reminds me of when worsley applauded the crowd in WC03 after being yellowed, and the castigation he (unfairly) got for that.
clark seems too big for his boots and needs a talking to. i can't imagine nigel redman not giving him a massive shoeing after the game.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 11:45 am
"What a disgrace", spot on from the commentator. Its refreshing to see some unbiased and fair commentary on an English game. Not sure how the referee managed to miss the swinging arm in the first offence and have to have the touch judge point it out to him. Looking back to "anonymous'" comments, the ban could be carried over to next season (though I'm not sure it would warrant a ban). I hope Clark is suitably embarassed and recieves appropriate punishment from his coach. What a disgusting attitude to have on the pitch.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:20 pm
Scumbag

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:47 pm
^^^^^^^^^^^
not a serial killer!
just a dumbass

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:50 pm
Silly bastard. Suspension is the only way to deal with that, what's with the smug swagger when he walks off after the red? At 18 he's got a pretty shit attitude and if he does make it to the highest level, he'll be kod in a second with that type of behaviour.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 12:54 pm
He got sent off not because of any damage done, but the fact that he already had a warning for the swinging arm, ignored the ref again. The intent was there but he was sent off for being an idiot more than anything else. Frontal lobes which help control aggression don't develop fully till your early twenties. Deserved RED

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:07 pm
what a fool...deserved red...warned after the first incident where he gave NZ 3 points........then warned again after first attempted headbutt then goes and tries it again causes no damage....but because of intent defo red card no question...

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:17 pm
What is sevens deal?

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 1:35 pm
A bright talent maybe, but he acts like a complete muppet.
The swinging arm was as stupid as it was pathetic, but the headbutt (twice!) was inexcusable.

The commentators were right on the money, after the red card and Clark's reaction: "an asbolute disgrace".

By Sander, at June 26, 2008 1:52 pm
I think he was frustrated because the kiwis were playing dirty and/or they were irritating calum clark.

overreaction of clark & the ref

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 2:10 pm
The swinging arms were meant to hurt, but in the end they were harmless, the headbutts were much more dangerous...

And for the anonymous that said that headbuts did no damage... Have you ever headbutted something hard? you do A LOT more damage that with a puch..

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 2:31 pm
he was punching not headbutting

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 2:50 pm
look at what you just said, the headbutts did no damage. yes they could do damage but they were even headbutts, he didnt butt him he just run at the ruck, jumped over the ruck n led with his head, it would have had no power behind it - hence why there was little reaction. i doubt the NZ player would have been very happy, but the fact that he didnt get any power behind it makes it stupid rather than dangerous, hence why the NZ players didnt bother reacting cos it wasnt worth it. eric, you cant just make a sweeping generalisation and say headbutts hurt more than punches, your completely ignored factors like force and technique. these headbutts did no damage, nor did the swinging arm they were just stupid and were just giving the ref a reason to punish him.
as for the pelous reference, its exactly the same principle, he intended to kick him, therefore surely by all your logic he must get set off cos he intended to kick him even though it did no damage, the only difference is that pelous tried to do it slyly.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 3:00 pm
HAHAHAHAHA that's so funny
but it's also extremely poor and disgusting, and he thinks it's a joke, I don't see much of a career for this douche

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 3:17 pm
Wow Stephanie there's about 45 comments on here that totally disagree with what you have to say, but you still think you're right on this one? lol

As for the New Zealand players not reacting, perhaps that's something called DISCIPLINE, a term Clark clearly needs to learn about.

You cannot headbutt on the rugby field. It's as simple as that. Whether he hurt the guy or not, he flew in and hit him with the head not once but twice. I don't know how you still fail to see the problem with that.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 3:29 pm
just because you say something im supposed to agree with you? guess theres no point in having a forum then. no i did see many things wrong with it, although i dont think it deserved red.
firstly on your point of discipline, just about everyones more disciplined than Clark in this case, but if one of your team mates and friends was being attacked i dont think most would just sit by and allow it to happen, no matter how professional the team, as evident in the dirty hits section. the two things he did were stupid because, if he aimed to hurt him which may have been the case, he didnt manage this at all, all he did was do two strange things which you dont see that often, except from taione, which technically fill the catagories of swinging arms and headbutts. however the swinging arm incident was basically aggressive rucking where he probably wanted to get at the player without hitting him directly, although the ref called it. second one was a bit of a strange one as well, it looked more like what two fighting rams do rather than a headbutt. everyone who plays rugby would have had a moment where a player does something when your reaction is what the hell are you doing? i think that pretty much summarises it really. if he had grabbed the guy and started punching his ribsand nutted him in the face i would say ye they were punches and headbutts and deserve red, but he didnt. sharky, everyones entitled to their opinions, and it doesnt bother me if you all moan, i have mine and im sticking to it. there are probably some out there that agree with me, it just seems the goody goody patrols out in force today

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 3:52 pm
Stephanie you make no sense what so ever, first you dont agree then you do, listen bottomline is he wasnt trying to get to the ball in the ruck he was delibratly head butting the other player beacuse he thought that player was offside. The punches were also on purpose as much as you wont to think all he was doing was giving him a bear hug he was trying to move the player by any means nessecary.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 3:56 pm
i have always said it deserved a yellow, however i have agreed with people that it was stupid. at no point did i say he was trying to bear hug him either, so dont patronise. try to keep up chazza

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 4:03 pm
Just a nice example of brainless player... No respect, no control, no courage, nothing to do with rugby

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 4:46 pm
jesuschrist stephanie ur such a moaning bitch jus shut up and drop it. shudnt b alowed, defo red

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 4:48 pm
so im a dick and a bitch? interesting combination there i think your a bit confused, although nice to that once someone disagrees with your views the age of prejudice comes out.
iv been reactive not proactive in this debate anyway, i doubt that your bigot head will understand that

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 4:56 pm
Completely stupid, he deserved the red card, the reaction to it is the worst part though, he doesn't even care. Maybe his attitude should be taken note of when he gets back to Leeds.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:00 pm
Stephanie, are you in fact Calum Clark? That's the only reason I can think of why you would actually be trying to defend this.

If he is not banned for this cowardly idiotic incident by the citing commisioner, then I sincerely hope that Leeds Carnegie do the right thing and ban him themselves for a period of time.

What a dick.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:08 pm
you got me!
no im not calum clark
its interesting though that on the Epi Taione video, alot of people are saying he got overexcited, was being stupid, and some even say he did no damage. interesting that this incident, which looks alot less worse than the Taione one, has people screaming for his head

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:22 pm
He seems like he is strong but unfortunetly he has no brain inside his cranium. What a pitty.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:22 pm
Jeez Stephanie talk about estragen lol give it a break if your going to put something like that up on a post like this be prepared to fight for it, didnt you say that you didnt care what people thought that it was your opinion well practice what you preach

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:24 pm
Tanqueray.....your comment made me laugh!! lol! and stephanie (aka Calum Clark) your abit out numbered here so i think you should just admit that you got it wrong this time! you cant use stupidity as a reason not to get sent off!!

the ref isnt going to witness you do somthing like a head but and say "well that was abit stupid now wasent it?? but ill let you away with it becasue you seem abit dim!!"

if you are stupid enough to do such a stupid thing then the stupid bugger should be sent off for being so stupid!!

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:26 pm
ohh and she isnt Calum Clark she's his mum

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:28 pm
Stephanie we're all for debate and discussion, and of course you're entitled to your opinion. It's just that in this case, 99% of the people think you're wrong, so my point is that maybe you should take that into account and reconsider your views on this. That's all. :)

The problem is you seem to be defending Clark emotionally not logically. So you're obviously English and/or he's a relative/friend of yours. Some of the other English guys on here have agreed he's a muppet (putting patriotism aside) for this incident, and yet you continue to defend him adamantly.

Maybe myself and the rest of the guys here will have to 'agree to disagree' with you on this one, cos it looks like you have your mind made up. :)

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:32 pm
dont think iv ever seen so many comments on rugbydymp!!!

oh and what an idiot!!

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:33 pm
chazza, what do you mean practise what you preach? at what point have i said it deserved a red card? at no point whatsoever. regardless of how many people have ganged up on me i have always stated, it was stupid and thats all. trying to belittle me doesnt give your argument any more validity. if you somehow discovered i was black, you wouldnt make jokes about that would you, and quite rightly because it would have no effect on an opinion. therefore dont resort to unintelligent, run of the mill sexist taunts, i spose it makes you feel like a man doesnt, especially since your so brave doing it over the internet!

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:36 pm
my god i wouldnt like to meet u stephanie!!! i think you have some issues! just accept that you are WRONG!! and i agree with the comment above......defo his mum!!ha

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:39 pm
What an idiot. There is no place for that in rugby, Taione is an idiot and at least he doesn't laugh after being sent off.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:44 pm
sharky, you sexist pig just because im a woman you think my support for hims emotional!
lol joking, although i wasnt joking with chezza he has genuine issues with women he needs to resolve.
ye i am very outnumbered here, but everyones got their views, it just i seem to be a small minority. there are some things that you cannot argue with for a red, and i guess you guys all think this is one but i just dont!
i dont know him, have no relation to him and im irish but live in england.
you say that there must be an emotional reason, but i think both these acts fall in a grey area, and personally i would have said it was a yellow on that basis. iv already told everyone this a million times tho but ye!

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 5:48 pm
Stephanie, often in rugby, a previous warning or talking to has a significant influence over a referees decision later on in the match.

The overly aggressive 'mauling' or swinging arms had a HUGE influence on this occasion, and you could kinda see, by the way the ref grabbed him and turned him to look at his number, that the red card was based as much on the previous indiscretion as the actual head butting.

Regarding the damage it did, it's not really up to us to decide. If it had cracked the NZ player on the nose, would that change your views? It probably would, which is where I think you're wrong. It's about intent, not the damage done.

Obviously damage done has an affect, as we saw with the Kankowski hit from the weekend, but at the end of the day it's purely up to the referee and what he feels at that current moment. And I still maintain, there was nothing wrong with the decision.

Clark's behaviour and pure arrogance afterwards probably helps me say that too.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 6:37 pm
he's a disgrace to modern rugby.
possibly might have to think hard about whether he will ever play for england because of his hot headedness

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 6:49 pm
ok i have to defend stephanie a bit here. let's not get racist or sexist, it's just childish. i'm sure we're all mature enough to keep this debate about the incident in the video.

on that note i really feel a strong argument has now been put forward by enough people to justify the straight red card.

it will be interesting to see what subsequent disciplinary action is taken against clark (if any). it will be a good indication of whether this transgression was red card worthy.

and for goodness sake, the pelous kick is nowhere near as bad as this. pelous' intention is never to cause harm but to push the player away and give him a message that he should stop arguing and head back over to his team mates.

he does intend to kick him yes, but the action you intend to carry out is not the same as the result you intend to get from it.

as i see it -

pelous - intended action = kick up the backside
pelous - intended outcome of action = push player away, give the player a message of 'piss off'

clark - intended action = head butt to the face
clark - intended outcome of action = cause physical harm to the opponent

great thread by the way. never seen so many comments on a video here

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 7:03 pm
yeh stephanie ur completely wrong, mayb jus accept it ? :P

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 7:09 pm
Headbutting is incredibly dangerous and a very malicious, and nasty type of foul to commit. It was disgraceful play on his part but lets hope its just youthful folly and he grows out of it. Has nothing to do with whether he's english or not

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 7:28 pm
The idiot deserved a red for either of those actions for doing them where the ref could see. He's a flanker for Christ's sake; he should do it at the bottom of a ruck where noone can see.

Seriously though, the headbutts were ridiculous and his attitude afterwards just confirms that he belongs more in football than in rugby.

For those who claim a headbutt is not dangerous - do you have any idea what happens when someone lands a headbutt (or a punch/knee/elbow) dead on the bony part of your nose? It can be deadly.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 8:17 pm
headbutt can't be defended, was just plain stupid.

I don't get what was wrong with the swiminging arm, he was swinging from the hip aswell as arm to make contact with the shoulder on the guy who the ref should have told to move, if the ref won't move him then you move him yourself

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 8:34 pm
stephanie im only thirteen so no it doesnt make me feel like a man, but if you write something like that be prepared to get all hell for it

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 9:02 pm
ohh and im sorry if you thought i was sexist actually i am quite atracted to women lol but really im sorry if i hurt you feelings, and i really think that its great we finaly have at least one girl commenting here at RD sorry again

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 9:27 pm
I love the way a lot of these comments say that he shouldn't have been penalised because although the intent was there he did minimal damage. They're so right. I mean attempted murder doesn't warrent punishment, so why should this guy. And the way he laughs after. He's obviously a nice light-hearted guy. Laughing about headbutting someone like that. Great guy.

By Madser, at June 26, 2008 10:20 pm
It was a red. No-one will change my mind on that.
I was pleased to see the commentators (any idea who they were - sounded like bill B) totally condemn his reaction.
Its full acceptance and responsibility of ones actions that tends to differentiate football and rugby players in there attitude. I hope this player has taken time out to see exactly how much of a tit he looked.
Rugby is about control and discipline. I've seen this fella play and he's good, I hope he learns his lesson, not just about controlling his aggression but also about his attitude.

Keep it real guys... and gals.
Nice to see a lady on here by the way stephanie.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 10:28 pm
Whast a willy. I guess he wanted his performance to be remembered one way or the other.

By Anonymous, at June 26, 2008 11:09 pm
absolutely horrendous. young lad has a lot of growing up to do and shouldnt be seen on the international stage for a long time if he wants the respect his rugby potential deserves.

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 12:23 am
Stephanie, I admire your one-eyed stance on the whole incident and you stick by your initial opinion.
However, FACT: he connected with his head (powerful or not).
The NZ players are tough and play with honour (just look at their haka) - they are warriors. The recipient probably just took it well.
If you look at the replay, Clark lines him up runs into the maul (not to join it to help the drive) but with one intention. FFS his feet actually leave the ground to reach the other guys head.
Watch the replay again and you tell me what else you think he is trying to do?
It was definitely the right decision to give him a red card.

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 12:33 am
Hahahaha the guys a nutter. But he's only 18 so hopefully he'll mature. Rather see that than a spear, at least it probably isn't going to cause as much damage. Red is correct decision.

Although he is a 7 and lets face it all the best ones I've played against are all pretty crazy. I wonder what the percentage of players getting sent off that are number 7s is.

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 12:35 am
People make mistakes, give the kid a break!!! I guarantee every one of you has lost there temper before, I bet no one was filming that!!!

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 3:00 am
RED
Looks like cowardice...the fella's obviously got game to be a GP premiership player at that age but can't use rugby-skills to take on NZ?
Fair enough it didn't cause much damage but it's not a headbutting cometition.
btw I'm Irish

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 4:36 am
ted, i'm sure everyone has lost their temper, but to the extent of headbutting to cause injury?.....twice? i doubt it.

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 6:05 am
Haha - definite red. This isn't UFC buddy.

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 6:08 am
my friend boasted the other day about her cousin that plays for the england under 20 team and how she was going to cardiff to watch him in the final, didn't mention this afterwards though. i'm gonna give her some stick over this i can tell you.

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 10:02 am
What on earth was he thinking? I think he'll regret that for a very long time. Not liking the ani english comments on here. Are you trying to say that is typical from an english rugby player? Grow up. Kiwi spear tackles are much worse.

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 10:30 am
how superbly hypocritical of you andy

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 11:30 am
The first offense of swinging the arm could have been just a warning given there was not to much damage being done. If he would have been warned the ref could have calmed down the player and prohibited future offenses. Even clean players can react violently when they get frustrated. I did not watch the whole game so I don’t know if this is the case or not. Given he was yellow carded you would think he be on best behavior when he reentered the game and delivering a “head butt” in any situation is just stupid.

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 4:19 pm
@anonymous

You won't get away with a yellow if you bunch another in the face when he 1)isn't looking 2) is down 3) or is tied up in a maul. Handbags are just that, and refs let it go on cause it is men being men. Maybe a yellow if the fellas need to cool off. But cowardly actions like hitting a defenseless opponent, or intentionally trying to injure one is not what rugby is about and thats why you see reds in those situations while some punches get off lighter. I personally am a fan of this discrepancy, as it reflects the balance of rugby's superficially violent nature with its underlying principles of fair play and sportsmanship

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 4:46 pm
anonymous, whether damage is done is of no absolutely no relavence whartsoever. If you headbutt someone and happen not to hurt them very much you're still going to get sent off.

By Anonymous, at June 27, 2008 5:06 pm
Stephanie is fucking awesome! She's right.

Rugby played with the one team having an advantage in numbers is much less fun to watch and to play.

I think people sometimes forget what a red card actually is.

- pentalty = 3 points or territory for the other team
- yellow card: 3 points or territory + you have an under strength team for 10min (=1/8 of the game)
- red card: 3 points/territory + you're a man down for the whole game

the flanker should have gotten a yellow with a talking to from the ref, just to let him know is being silly and let him cool down. if he'd done something after that sure thats a red.

a red is if a player picks someone up and drills his head into the ground on purpose or beats someone up.

By Anonymous, at June 28, 2008 2:17 pm
stephanie is not right, and neither are you tim.
headbutting someone deliberately is just pure violence and has to be made totally unacceptable - we don't want little kids running around thinking its okay to copy that sort of behaviour. the only way to do that is by showing a red card to anyone who does it.
also call me a pedant but a penalty isn't exactly a guaranteed 3 points. unless you're chris paterson.

By Anonymous, at June 28, 2008 11:21 pm
A headbutt is a headbutt regardless of how much damage it does or doesn't do so it is definately a red card no question about it.

Thing thats stupid is he lines him up for the headbutt and tries a few times not just once so he's an idiot.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2008 12:31 am
how comes the comments with swearwords got deleted yet the sexist comments didnt?

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2008 7:09 pm
Over 101 comments to read through, apologies if we missed the sexist ones. There's no place for obvious and unnecessary swearing though, so those will be removed when possible.

By GMC, at June 30, 2008 12:31 am
ye completely understand, wasnt condoned swearing was just comparing. keep up the brilliant work, best website out there!

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2008 1:16 am
yes i agree! first thing i agree with you on stephanie!

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2008 3:21 am
To anyone saying no red the read the foooking rules! if a player head butts another player it is automatically a red.....99% of the time, obv henderson got away with a head nudge in the 6 nations.

He clearly lined the guy up and Epi Taione (or however you spell it) was written all over it. You cant change the rules just because it didnt work out for the guy, e.g if he had smashed the kiwi's cheekbone and nose and knocked out teeth it would be a red right!!! well you cant say "oh it should be a yellow because he didnt connect properly!"

anyway, great video!

Thanks!

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2008 1:25 pm
Stephanie - you give us girls a bad name. Give an opnion and argue facts...and keep the Chick stuff out of it.

By Anonymous, at July 01, 2008 4:51 pm
so because im a girl i should use a fake name so people dont know?
the 'chick' stuff only started because other people brought it into it, i only defended myself. the reason that sort of thing is acceptable still is because people like you.
i think you will find im also the only person showing a different opinion.
obviously it was wrong of me to not tolerate sexism, i really should have let the stereotype continue and just giggled really shouldnt i!

By Anonymous, at July 02, 2008 1:35 pm
I think he deserved what he got, i like him as a player, and hes cute to boot (yes i do fancy players on their looks aswell im only human =P) haha but in all seriousness the ref seemed right, it wasnt dangerous but what ref is going to keep putting up with a player who is being overly agressive in a game? not worth the trouble, rugby needs to be played and if your going to play without thinking properly, then you need to be sent to the bench, thats what i think.

By Anonymous, at July 08, 2008 8:12 am
I'm sorry but if he's stupid enough to commit an offense such as that so obviously in front of the ref then he deserves to be red carded! There is no place in rugby for such actions and stupidity! To be an international 7 you need to be tough and up for it but you also need your wits! It's what makes flankers like McCaw, Williams, Burger, Back and the best Richard Hill such fantastic players!! Don't remember them ever head butting anyone but always playing so close to the rules. All IMO :)

By Anonymous, at December 10, 2008 11:55 pm