• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

The customer is always right?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
46 Posts 16 Posters 6.6k Views
The customer is always right?
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to Cudnel on last edited by
    #41

    @Cudnel said in The customer is always right?:

    @Crucial Fair enough, an on report approach would be a another reasonable option, along with a double yellow, that would help referees do their job well.

    As I said there really should be some sensible sanction between sitting in the naughty chair for 10 mins and the nuclear option given there are so many factors at play during incidents in a rugby game.

    Are you calling 'double yellow' the concept where the team loses the offending player for the game but can replace them after 10 minutes?

    The problem with that is the inequity from game to game. An early offence has a big impact but an offence in the last 30 probably the same as a straight YC as the player was probably going to be replaced anyway.
    You often see a replacement come on after the 10 for a YCd player later in the game.

    P 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    wrote on last edited by
    #42

    Maybe you lose two subs? Keep the teams even, but still have a big impact on the team?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • C Offline
    C Offline
    Cudnel
    wrote on last edited by
    #43

    @Crucial I think any intermediate sanction such as on report, or double yellow etc. would need thinking through.

    Perhaps a double yellow, if lawmakers thought that was sensible, could send the offender off, and their replacement mightn't be able to come on for 15 or 20 mins?

    There'll be always be arguments about what's best, but something like the above would improve the game I reckon.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    pakman
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #44

    @Crucial You make a good point about the timing of an offence and impact of double yellow.
    But it seems to me the suggestion is that double yellow would be in lieu of red in cases which weren't clear cut.
    So to draw the comparison, a red at say 65 minutes isn't much worse than yellow in impact, so not much lost by double yellow in such instance. However, red after 10 has a major impact, and can end a contest. Whereas a double yellow in such a borderline case mitigates the impact, but as you intimate is a materially bigger penalty than single yellow at such an early stage.
    Must say, I'm warming to double yellow concept.

    CrucialC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to pakman on last edited by
    #45

    @pakman said in The customer is always right?:

    @Crucial You make a good point about the timing of an offence and impact of double yellow.
    But it seems to me the suggestion is that double yellow would be in lieu of red in cases which weren't clear cut.
    So to draw the comparison, a red at say 65 minutes isn't much worse than yellow in impact, so not much lost by double yellow in such instance. However, red after 10 has a major impact, and can end a contest. Whereas a double yellow in such a borderline case mitigates the impact, but as you intimate is a materially bigger penalty than single yellow at such an early stage.
    Must say, I'm warming to double yellow concept.

    You're neglecting the fact that a Red means an automatic ticket in the judicial lottery. A YC has to pass someone declaring that the ref was lenient then that doubt also enters the judicial process because you can point to the man on the spot thinking it wasn't that bad.

    P 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    pakman
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #46

    @Crucial You raise a relevant wrinkle. For me a double yellow wouldn't lead to automatic judiciary. If someone then cites so be it.
    If we look at Luatua and Fekitoa against Ireland I think a double yellow would have been perfectly adequate. Sloppy/clumsy play without malicious intent. For me further punishment excessively harsh.
    Cane versus Ireland for me a most would be yellow as Henshaw spun into head contact.
    And I do think if a player jumps recklessly for ball, catches it in contact and lands on head then if the authorities want to improve safety there is a strong argument for yellow carding the 'victim'.
    One last thing. Given the general disgruntlement with carding, the relevant authorities (SANZAR?), rather than hiding 'guidelines' which are in effect rules in practice, ought to publicise such guidelines so they can be subject to proper scrutiny in the court of public opinion.
    It appears that refs have been given guidance for what is yellow and what is red in, say, a jump situation. And refs risk sanction if they don't comply. Such arbitrary guidelines often fall down in live situations -- one simply can't legislate for all possibilities.
    As suggested above in thread IMHO the double yellow would represent a good compromise in the grey areas.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0

The customer is always right?
Sports Talk
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.