Alternative to Red Cards?



  • n.b. I'm not disputing Barrett's card - he put himself in the frame for it.

    Is there an alternative to red cards in their current form?

    Perhaps a combination of points awarded to the opposition, loss of the player for multiples of 10 minutes, and the player not being able to come back on?

    e.g. Red Card in the 1st half = 14 point penalty + 20 minutes with 14 men. In the 2nd half = 7 point penalty + 20 minutes with 14 men.


  • Banned

    This post is deleted!


  • This post is deleted!


  • This post is deleted!

  • Banned

    This post is deleted!


  • This post is deleted!


  • This post is deleted!


  • @Tim said in Alternative to Red Cards?:
    > n.b. I'm not disputing Barrett's card - he put himself in the frame for it.



  • Don't discuss the Barrett card in this thread.


  • Banned

    This post is deleted!

  • Banned

    This post is deleted!


  • This post is deleted!


  • WC final, some grub takes out the opposition’s ten with foul play. You lose some points and 20mins, they lose 80min and their goal kicker.

    Has to be sent off IMO.

    It easy to avoid, and very rare.



  • This post is deleted!


  • This post is deleted!


  • This post is deleted!


  • @Kirwan said in Alternative to Red Cards?:

    It easy to avoid, and very rare.

    On the face of it I agree with you, then again I've seem Sam Warburton and Ben Smith - two bloody smart, even keeled players commit red card offences in knockout games for seemingly no apparent reason. Mental blocks and brain farts happen.

    The current system works pretty well for league tournaments like Super Rugby but ignores the realities of international rugby where RWC's come around once every four years, a Grand Slam every six or so and a Lions tour every twelve. I would prefer they roll things back to the 00's era where red cards were reserved for wilfully violent acts and repeated infringements and increase the post-game suspensions.

    In the current era with one more camera angle and an overzealous TMO who has been given the mandate to "send a message" Game 1 of the 2005 Lions series is over before it began. Talk about wind out of the sails. Wait another 12 years...



  • It's almost like a duckworth-lewis (insert other name they added) type approach. How do you calculate the penalty in a meaningful and repeatable way. I do like the idea of mid-way card or call between yellow and red - where you sit down for longer but aren't rubbed out of the game entirely.

    But the one aspect that @Kirwan alluded to is the total grub play or a high end offence that takes another player off the field. Hmmm could it be something like 20min but if the player they hurt doesn't return they can't either? That could be abused no doubt, but I agree there still needs to be a top tier option for that sort of play.



  • The game is so fast paced these days, there is no distinction between a badly mistimed contact and an obviously reckless one. An Owen Farrell shoulder charge is almost premeditated, vs a close quarters forward exchange



  • I've always thought having the man gone for rest of the match but team can replace them after a period, either 10 mins like a YC or maybe make it a 15 min sanction.

    IMO the sanction ruins the game as a spectacle, very rarely does a player do the dangerous action with the sole intention of injuring or hurting someone, particularly at the elite level, this is their job, deliberately hurting another would impact their income (maybe add in a financial implication too, based on their earnings)

    As dumb as these incidents might be, I am not convinced they are done with malicious intent - the French guy whose one was cancelled, SBW, one was timing the other technique, neither malicious IMO - if it is a punch or kick, IMO much easier to distinguish that kind of foul play.

    It is most often down to poor timing, poor technique and add in a bit of bad luck with the other person in the situation who you have zero control over.

    Maybe a technique related red card and a one for actions not within the game (punch, kick, head butts etc)



  • The league system of putting a player on report has pros and cons too. On one hand, video evidence may exonerate a player who may well have been sent off, but the flip side is that the player gets a lengthy ban but his team has not been materially punished, and may even have won the game.

    I think there would definitely need to be a points deterrent and 14 pts is still significant in the context of a game. Maybe the player then needs to be immediately replaced but the team still has 15 players on the field. The complication is if the player replaced is a replacement themselves. In that situation the team would have to rearrange their team or lose a man if it's a front rower, like the current law.



  • Red card = man sent off. He can be replaced after 20 minutes to bring the game back to 15 players.



  • @Billy-Tell said in Alternative to Red Cards?:

    Red card = man sent off. He can be replaced after 20 minutes to bring the game back to 15 players.

    This could work as you lose a sub and that time. I would add a Red+ for violent acts, and that's the same as it is now.

    I can see the benefits now that reckless play is being punished more severely to have a halfway house between what we have now.



  • Perhaps there should be more options between 10 minutes and the entire game?



  • @Tim yes, but we don't want to get to complex. There seems room for an a system lik this;

    White: On report to be looked at by the judicary, no on field sanction other than a penalty.

    Yellow: As it is now

    Red: 20mins, and the the player can't come back but you can use a sub to get back to 15

    Black: Off for the whole game,for violent acts.



  • Is it bad I now want to see someone get a black card?



  • @Kirwan I was focussing on the "black" end, as it is the one that ruins games for the crowd. The problem is that spectators have no expectation that the red-card team can win. Now if there was a serious points penalty, but not a 14 man deficit for the entire game, then perhaps we would have a better solution?



  • @Tim I think the points thing wouldn't work. In rugby it can be hard to score in bad weather, for example. So the points penatly would have a different effect



  • @Kirwan Don't forget that a system doesn't have to perfect to be better.



  • @Tim Yeah, get that. But it has to be fairer, and consistent with how rugby works now. Even with a penalty, you still have to use skill to kick the goal.

    Just handing over points doesn't feel right.



  • @Kirwan To me, 14 points vs. 50 minutes with a man down seems like the former is a better and fairer competition.



  • Would also feel pretty hollow to lose a game because of a 79th minute red card in an otherwise non threatening position (e.g high shot when the opponent are trying to run the ball out of their own 22).

    For point penalties to really work you'd have to incorporate them into every part of the game, not just red cards.



  • @Billy-Tell said in Alternative to Red Cards?:

    Red card = man sent off. He can be replaced after 20 minutes to bring the game back to 15 players.

    And if a player is sent off with 19 mins to go? Just bad luck and timing?

    I thought there was a study done which showed that, on average, a yellow card usually costs a team about 14 pts. Perhaps more applicable if it is a PT and YC.



  • @Kirwan said in Alternative to Red Cards?:

    Is it bad I now want to see someone get a black card?

    Yes, it is. Black is the colour of good.

    Bring in an orange between yellow and red.

    Not that I'm suggesting the incident that shall not be discussed in this thread should have been an orange ...



  • If you wanted to gift points to the opposition the best you could do to at least keep things adjacent to the way rugby is played is perhaps award a penalty in front on the 22 metre line irregardless of field position of the offence - similar to a penalty try/technical foul in basketball.

    Play could then recommence with a penalty at the place of the infringement as normal or with a kick off if you want to be less punitive.

    The issue is that most cards happen on defense within kicking range anyway.



  • @Cyclops said in Alternative to Red Cards?:

    Would also feel pretty hollow to lose a game because of a 79th minute red card in an otherwise non threatening position (e.g high shot when the opponent are trying to run the ball out of their own 22).

    One would think it would feel hollow to win a game after the ball ricochets off your bat for four or after a deal was brokered in the 79th minute, but seemingly not.



  • @Tim I really don't like the 14 point penalty - coaches will coach their players to seek to draw red cards - e.g. in a RWC game with 5 minutes left and you're 13 points down - diving into people's shoulders. It's a perverse incentive.

    I think the solution is three types of cards - a red card goes back to what it was for in the days of Colin Meads - punching, stomping, gouging - stuff that almost never happens these days.

    A blue card - player sent off for 10 minutes and must be replaced by a different player - for serious technical infringements - e.g. Barrett. Goes before judiciary.

    Yellow card.

    They can't continue to ruin big matches with 14 playing 15.

    I see Steady Eddie has said the Barrett one was ridiculous and there could equally have been two similar in England vs Wales.

    IMO he's right. It was certainly very soft to lose a man for - if that's one of the four worst things the ABs have ever done then they should all be canonized! 🙂

    p.s. I see amidst the red cards issued earlier @Kirwan suggesting the same thing.



  • @rotated said in Alternative to Red Cards?:

    @Cyclops said in Alternative to Red Cards?:

    Would also feel pretty hollow to lose a game because of a 79th minute red card in an otherwise non threatening position (e.g high shot when the opponent are trying to run the ball out of their own 22).

    One would think it would feel hollow to win a game after the ball ricochets off your bat for four or after a deal was brokered in the 79th minute, but seemingly not.

    Perhaps you should have the discipline to hold the ball, understanding the state of the game, rather than throw and risk a freak occurrence that upsets an otherwise almost unassailable position?



  • @Bovidae said in Alternative to Red Cards?:

    I thought there was a study done which showed that, on average, a yellow card usually costs a team about 14 pts. Perhaps more applicable if it is a PT and YC.

    Not that much for a yellow apparently.
    "Since 2012, South Africa have averaged just a minus one (-1) point deficit when down a man, while Australia have managed a two point advantage against teams who have a conceded a card."
    ABs "Those sin-bins didn’t have a great impact though, with an average points difference of only -0.3. That is down to both an excellent defence and the fact they have often managed to outscore opponents, despite being down a player."

    Read more at https://www.rugbyworld.com/tournaments/european-champions-cup/stats-yellow-cards-really-bad-39058#U2rWh9FKm6Rb9kfm.99

    Don't have answer to the red problem though. I must admit to not watching the second half until later as I knew we were going to lose with a man down for 40, so would have been well annoyed if I had paid for a ticket. Rugby is all about a contest, that is severely diminished when 15 on 14 for long periods of time.



  • Add me to the idea of a third card between yellow and red. It seems an obvious solution, which is why I'm sure World Rugby won't be able to come up with it.

    I get that they are trying to send a message to stamp out foul play, but to expand the scope of red cards was not a smart way to do that. An orange card (or whatever colour you want) to give a more severe punishment for high end yellows would still send that message without completely ruining the game.


Log in to reply