Red cards



  • In League there is no one sent off in a red card offence and the offender is cited after the match where they are suspended for various weeks depending on the offence.

    Union should do the same except the offender be should sin binned for ten minutes then be cited after the match.

    I would also like to see an Orange card which is for an offence between a yellow and a red with the offender getting 15 minutes in the bin.

    Sending red card offenders off the field for the remainder of the game is ridiculous...thousands have paid alot of money to fly over stay in expensive hotels buy expensive tickets to watch their team...yes penalise the offender after a fair match where millions of viewers can enjoy the game in a fair contest.



  • @Blackheart said in Red cards:

    In League there is no one sent off in a red card offence and the offender is cited after the match where they are suspended for various weeks depending on the offence.

    Union should do the same except the offender be should sin binned for ten minutes then be cited after the match.

    In Soccer Football a red card is an automatic dismissal for the rest of the game. It's been that way for over 100 years and appears to be working for them. (As lots of reds are for two yellows in football, they do tend to be late in the game.)

    Likewise field hockey, handball etc.

    Most of the games I can think of where ejected players are replaced are American rather than European in origin. League being the exception.



  • What other team sports send players off and not replaced? I can think of soccer but that player has to have a yellow first. How do other major codes deal with foul play?



  • Red card system is fine how it is IMO. Players should tackle properly.



  • @chimoaus said in Red cards:

    What other team sports send players off and not replaced? I can think of soccer but that player has to have a yellow first. How do other major codes deal with foul play?

    Not necessarily. As noted above two yellows earns a red, but you can get a straight red.



  • @Blackheart said in Red cards:

    In League there is no one sent off in a red card offence and the offender is cited after the match where they are suspended for various weeks depending on the offence.

    Union should do the same except the offender be should sin binned for ten minutes then be cited after the match.

    I would also like to see an Orange card which is for an offence between a yellow and a red with the offender getting 15 minutes in the bin.

    Sending red card offenders off the field for the remainder of the game is ridiculous...thousands have paid alot of money to fly over stay in expensive hotels buy expensive tickets to watch their team...yes penalise the offender after a fair match where millions of viewers can enjoy the game in a fair contest.

    Not correct. You can still get sent off. Just the NRL have traded their ethics for the dollar and now they refuse to remove thugs.

    As for a fair contest, I'd suggest that the player ejected chose not to make the game a fair contest by electing to play outside the laws and commit an act of foul play.



  • The Red card rule as it is also gives the possibility of a single dodgy ref call 100% determining the result of a match. We've had plenty of threads over the years of such dodgy red card calls. The game isn't tiddlywinks and it runs at at phrenetic pace, accidents will happen and slo-mo makes them seem far more intentional than they are. If that was the AB's out there against England in the WC final and Whitelock had done the same hit in the first 20 mins I'd be surprised if many would be praising the decision. This Argie has form certainly but that shouldn't have influenced the refs decision.



  • Does anyone know a good stats website that could filter games that have had red cards in them?
    Would be very interesting to see the percentage of teams that have actually gone on to win a game with a first half red card etc.

    Im struggling to think of many/any games where a red carded team has won.
    Possibly way back when Jonah got two yellows playing for the chiefs against the waratahs. I think the chiefs still won that game. But i would have been about 12 so a bit hazy in my memory.



  • @Yeetyaah said in Red cards:

    Red card system is fine how it is IMO. Players should tackle properly.

    Disagree, should be for proper foul play. Eye gouging someone and slipping up, miss timing, attacker ducking head high tackles aren’t the same thing.

    I’d prefer:
    Red card -gouging, biting, other deliberate foul play etc.
    Red card player, yellow card team - high shots etc that aren’t deliberate foul play.



  • @Nepia Disagree. How is a shoulder to the head not foul play? Bad technique, which the player can control, by tackling high in the first place which leads to contact with the head.



  • @Yeetyaah said in Red cards:

    @Nepia Disagree. How is a shoulder to the head not foul play? Bad technique, which the player can control, by tackling high in the first place which leads to contact with the head.

    Disagree with your disagree. Only if you pretend rugby is played in a vacuum. There’s room for error in every match and by applying your strict letter of the law I could probably find a red card in every match of the RWC so far.

    My method allows for a contest to remain and if a player is later found to have been deliberate in their foul play they can cop a huge suspension.



  • Am I perhaps remembering rugby with rose tinted glasses but I do not recall the prevalence of head shots back in the day.

    Is it a function of players getting bigger, stronger and more powerful that they're having to hit harder and higher, with associated higher risk?



  • @booboo said in Red cards:

    Am I perhaps remembering rugby with rose tinted glasses but I do not recall the prevalence of head shots back in the day.

    Is it a function of players getting bigger, stronger and more powerful that they're having to hit harder and higher, with associated higher risk?



  • @Nepia yeah for me a RC should be reserved for those deliberate actions.

    As has been mentioned before, maybe an orange card, where a player goes off for the rest of the game, but after 15 or 20 mins can be replaced.

    There is too much at stake these days,for player, teams, sponsors and then the people that make it all possible, fans, to go along to a match and have it ruined in 20 mins due to a RC...especially when you look at some of the weak arsecards these days, then the cardable offences that go unpunished...it just pisses people off and creates the bias calls.

    If there were less RCs and more judiciary visits...I'd even go as far as saying any YC for dangerous play (even accidental ) should at least have a visit to judiciary.



  • So the purpose of the red card is to increase player safety. I guess we need some statistics showing the average number of high tackles per game over the last 10 years or so. Then they would need to see if the new framework has reduced the number of high tackles per game. Only then could you see if the framework has made any difference at all.

    I believe the current rush defence/dominant tackle game plan has increased the odds of a misjudged high shot, especially by taller players who already have a higher center of gravity.

    If players continue this game plan the framework will have little effect on reducing non deliberate misjudged high shots. They will continue to happen as a byproduct of playing rugby. If this is the case rugby will always have a percentage of games decided by red cards and not the 15v15 everyone paid to watch.

    Yes players should just tackle lower however any team playing NZ must have a strategy of attacking the ball to stop the offloads, this increases the risk of a high shot.

    I do not believe the current framework will reduce high shots as effectively as tip tackles, does anyone have any idea what will?



  • Lowering the tackle height saw no less head injuries in this trial

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/47000468
    “RFU tackle height trial ended after concussions rise in Championship Cup”

    I’d suggest, forcing tacklers to go low is dangerous, especially where a player goes for a gap only to be double tackled. The head clashing between tacklers will sky rocket. Not only that but knees to the head of the tackler.

    WR have really ballsed this one up. The tackles they deem to be cards all happen very frequently in a match, are fairly difficult to avoid and will continue to happen. The ref or TMO if looking, I'm sure could find half a dozen such collisions in a match.



  • @chimoaus playing tiddlywinks instead



  • I think the problem is for a lot of the 2010s players were coached to tackle high to smother the offload.

    Players with a more classical technique always used to tackle low and hard.

    IMHO World Rugby's stand against the high tackle is a good one and is improving the game as a spectacle once again and asvwell as promoting player safety and protecting their long-twrm health.



  • I’ve complained about this on Twitter, and had a few people respond ‘just tackle lower’.

    But I’m not sure those people have ever played rugby. High tackles are just a part of the game, and I’m not sure you can ever eradicate them. Yes some are a result of reckless play, but others are just instinct (sticking out an arm when you’ve been stepped by a halfback near the ruck), or tiredness (being caught on the back foot in the late stages of a game).

    I’m not sure how you eradicate that from the game. Especially for players above 6ft 6.

    At the moment World Rugby have signalled they are happy to ruin games as a spectacle in order to change player behaviour. I think that’s too big a trade-off, and think they need to find a better balance between protecting the players and ensuring games are enjoyable for fans.



  • For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?



  • @Yeetyaah said in Red cards:

    @Nepia Disagree. How is a shoulder to the head not foul play? Bad technique, which the player can control, by tackling high in the first place which leads to contact with the head.

    When an attacker is at knee height diving into contact.



  • @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    Not tackle apparently.



  • @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    Go go gadget a tunnelling machine.



  • @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    move into the big spoon position and kiss him gently on the back of the neck while giving a reacharound.



  • @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    er, you answered it in your question....

    just tackle lower

    Sheesh alt text



  • I agree with what Barbarian said. Of course, players’ safety is important. And, of course, you have to discourage high tackles. But this overlooks the fact that the game is now faster and more intense than it once was; players are bigger and more aerobically fit; the hits are harder; and, most of all, the money involved is significantly greater. It’s now a truly professional sport, completely different to what existed as recently as the mid-90s. Sponsorships and broadcast rights and ticket prices and all the other costs are much higher. But World Rugby is still treating the professional code as it does the amateur one. You simply can’t expect consumers to put up with spending tens of thousands of dollars on flights, tickets and accommodation to games, only to destroy the entire spectacle with often random and highly technical decisions that turn games into no contests.

    What we saw in the All Blacks-Namibian game this afternoon exemplifies the problem. A player dropping into a tackle leaves the defence in an impossible position. According to the letter of the law, there is contact to the head. But what other choice is there? It didn’t matter in this instance because it was a superpower against a minnow, but you can imagine the angst if this occurs in a knock-out game as I’m sure it will.

    The answer is to sin-in players and cite them for a call-up to the judiciary. Let the game flow and ensure the people who’ve paid BIG bucks to attend get to see a fair match.

    You can operate a different regime for the amateur code.

    For now, it looks like World Rugby is using the world’s premier showcase as a social engineering opportunity.



  • @barbarian The problem is the incentives at the administrator level. These people get paid whatever happens and they’re willing to have the paying public sacrificed. They have a stranglehold on the rights of the code and aren’t exposed to any market discipline.

    I foresee an eventual consumer class action against World Rugby that takes a few of these superannuated mediocrities to the cleaners.



  • @MrDenmore said in Red cards:

    You simply can’t expect consumers to put up with spending tens of thousands of dollars on flights, tickets and accommodation to games, only to destroy the entire spectacle with often random and highly technical decisions that turn games into no contests.

    That's international netball. We don't want it to ruin our game as well



  • @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    Not lead with a swinging arm to the head.

    Let the ball carrier continue his trajectory to the dirt, then jackal.



  • @MiketheSnow said in Red cards:

    @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    Not lead with a swinging arm to the head.

    Let the ball carrier continue his trajectory to the dirt, then jackal.

    Ofa used the same technique that he uses all the time, only difference was the attacker lead with his head low to the ground. I believe these professional players tackle technique is likely a subconscious activity that happens the same nearly every time. To say he deliberately lead with an arm to the head of the opponent is unfair on those players.



  • @chimoaus said in Red cards:

    @MiketheSnow said in Red cards:

    @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    Not lead with a swinging arm to the head.

    Let the ball carrier continue his trajectory to the dirt, then jackal.

    Ofa used the same technique that he uses all the time, only difference was the attacker lead with his head low to the ground. I believe these professional players tackle technique is likely a subconscious activity that happens the same nearly every time. To say he deliberately lead with an arm to the head of the opponent is unfair on those players.

    The Argie guy showed intent, you could see in his face he was out to hurt. Our boys didn't, but it is now a technical problem that everyone is racing to correct. Arms to be used for grappling only



  • @MiketheSnow said in Red cards:

    @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    Not lead with a swinging arm to the head.

    Let the ball carrier continue his trajectory to the dirt, then jackal.

    I agree that is the less risky, but more passive option, which is where the 'tackling instinct ' obviously needs to revert.

    But what if he was defending on his tryline in that scenario? Serious question.



  • @Rapido said in Red cards:

    @MiketheSnow said in Red cards:

    @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    Not lead with a swinging arm to the head.

    Let the ball carrier continue his trajectory to the dirt, then jackal.

    I agree that is the less risky, but more passive option, which is where the 'tackling instinct ' obviously needs to revert.

    But what if he was defending on his tryline in that scenario? Serious question.

    Then it would have been a penalty try.



  • Talking about goal line defence, aren’t lots of the tackles actually over head level, they actually fall over the player and tackle their lower back. Most of those tackles are just a lottery in regards to head contact.



  • @MiketheSnow said in Red cards:

    @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    Not lead with a swinging arm to the head.

    Let the ball carrier continue his trajectory to the dirt, then jackal.

    Bullshit Mike. You've played. In that spot you do the same thing.



  • @barbarian said in Red cards:

    I’ve complained about this on Twitter, and had a few people respond ‘just tackle lower’.

    But I’m not sure those people have ever played rugby. High tackles are just a part of the game, and I’m not sure you can ever eradicate them. Yes some are a result of reckless play, but others are just instinct (sticking out an arm when you’ve been stepped by a halfback near the ruck), or tiredness (being caught on the back foot in the late stages of a game).

    I’m not sure how you eradicate that from the game. Especially for players above 6ft 6.

    At the moment World Rugby have signalled they are happy to ruin games as a spectacle in order to change player behaviour. I think that’s too big a trade-off, and think they need to find a better balance between protecting the players and ensuring games are enjoyable for fans.

    This is probably the best post on this issue so far and clearly written from the practical perspective of someone who has played the game (presently or at least in the recent past by the look of things).

    The objective is an entirely noble one, but the means adopted by WR go too far. You simply cannot treat a marginally high tackle, caused by a timing issue (e.g. a late, high speed change of angle) in the same way your treat out-and-out foul play.

    It's just entirely unfair to the players, most importantly.

    There will be a red card during one of the knockout games in this tournament and it will cost a team 4 years of hard work and maybe even some careers. How on earth is that fair punishment for a purely accidental, fractionally mis-timed tackle?

    Edit: our only hope is that the unfortunate recipients of a red card in such a situation is England - only then will there be a sufficiently critical mass of whinging that WR will actually take a sensible approach to this issue.



  • @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    @MiketheSnow said in Red cards:

    @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    For the "just tackle lower" crowd, what exactly was Ofa T supposed to do differently?

    Not lead with a swinging arm to the head.

    Let the ball carrier continue his trajectory to the dirt, then jackal.

    Bullshit Mike. You've played. In that spot you do the same thing.

    Ah no.

    Never got penalised for a late and/or high tackle. Or swinging arm.

    Couple of instances in the France v Tonga match where the French players were happy for the Tongans to gain one, maybe two more metres going forward as they fell to the ground and then swooped in to try to steal the ball.

    On the goal line you don't have the luxury of those metres but as explained on another thread better to not infringe, concede a try, but still be on the park than infringe and be binned.



  • @junior I would have picked Owen Farrell, but so far he has curbed his natural instincts



  • @MiketheSnow really? I'm astounded.

    You prop like that, s bloke falls in to your arm, you get carded? Oosh that's tough



  • @mariner4life said in Red cards:

    @MiketheSnow really? I'm astounded.

    You prop like that, s bloke falls in to your arm, you get carded? Oosh that's tough

    Something about Mike's recent posts suggests to me he's taken a few too any high shots himself (either that or he's majorly on the piss).


Log in to reply