Red Cards & HIA
-
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
you do that by incentivising players not to do it, therefore punishing the player, team and fans as a result.
Fixed it for you.
I largely agree with you, but I am dead against punishing the team and fans.
I mean with your statement above about training differently for these accidental contacts, where do thuggish acts sit? Because you (world rugby) are punishing the same group with the same in game sanction; player, team, fans, no one trained that.
-
League are doing it better. Sure they have an arguably looser view of HIA type incidents. But these codes are fast and physical. There is little to no appreciation of that in union right now. Lumping foul play into the same group as poor technique or mistakes is just wrong
-
@canefan said in Red Cards & HIA:
League are doing it better. Sure they have an arguably looser view of HIA type incidents. But these codes are fast and physical. There is little to no appreciation of that in union right now. Lumping foul play into the same group as poor technique or mistakes is just wrong
I would be interested to see the head impact stats and long term study as IMO league is a disgrace in how it allows head contact and dangerous tackles and those are simply brushed off by commentators on the basis that hand wringing liberals don't understand the game.
-
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
@canefan said in Red Cards & HIA:
League are doing it better. Sure they have an arguably looser view of HIA type incidents. But these codes are fast and physical. There is little to no appreciation of that in union right now. Lumping foul play into the same group as poor technique or mistakes is just wrong
I would be interested to see the head impact stats and long term study as IMO league is a disgrace in how it allows head contact and dangerous tackles and those are simply brushed off by commentators on the basis that hand wringing liberals don't understand the game.
They haven't fixed the problem yet, but they also don't have a situation where the games are almost unwatchable and are being decided by cards
-
@taniwharugby said in Red Cards & HIA:
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
you do that by incentivising players not to do it, therefore punishing the player, team and fans as a result.
Fixed it for you.
I largely agree with you, but I am dead against punishing the team and fans.
I mean with your statement above about training differently for these accidental contacts, where do thuggish acts sit? Because you (world rugby) are punishing the same group with the same in game sanction; player, team, fans, no one trained that.
by training to tackle lower it means that always illegal tackles (not bent at the waist etc) happen less often, the goal of which is to bring down the number of unintentional but still illegal head shots. Punishing the team means you punish the coach who loses his job if his team lose every week because the team goes down to 14 thus incentivising better coaching of the tackle, only punishing the player not the team doesn't have that impact. That's the argument made by World Rugby and has merit IMO
-
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
@taniwharugby said in Red Cards & HIA:
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
you do that by incentivising players not to do it, therefore punishing the player, team and fans as a result.
Fixed it for you.
I largely agree with you, but I am dead against punishing the team and fans.
I mean with your statement above about training differently for these accidental contacts, where do thuggish acts sit? Because you (world rugby) are punishing the same group with the same in game sanction; player, team, fans, no one trained that.
by training to tackle lower it means that always illegal tackles (not bent at the waist etc) happen less often, the goal of which is to bring down the number of unintentional but still illegal head shots. Punishing the team means you punish the coach who loses his job if his team lose every week because the team goes down to 14 thus incentivising better coaching of the tackle, only punishing the player not the team doesn't have that impact. That's the argument made my World Rugby and has merit IMO
It's not working. How many remedial courses has Owen Farrell done and he still hits high? He's not the only one. The inconsistency of rulings, absorbing vs non absorbing tackles, mitigation. It's a mess even if their intentions are good
-
@canefan said in Red Cards & HIA:
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
@taniwharugby said in Red Cards & HIA:
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
you do that by incentivising players not to do it, therefore punishing the player, team and fans as a result.
Fixed it for you.
I largely agree with you, but I am dead against punishing the team and fans.
I mean with your statement above about training differently for these accidental contacts, where do thuggish acts sit? Because you (world rugby) are punishing the same group with the same in game sanction; player, team, fans, no one trained that.
by training to tackle lower it means that always illegal tackles (not bent at the waist etc) happen less often, the goal of which is to bring down the number of unintentional but still illegal head shots. Punishing the team means you punish the coach who loses his job if his team lose every week because the team goes down to 14 thus incentivising better coaching of the tackle, only punishing the player not the team doesn't have that impact. That's the argument made my World Rugby and has merit IMO
It's not working. How many remedial courses has Owen Farrell done and he still hits high? He's not the only one. The inconsistency of rulings, absorbing vs non absorbing tackles, mitigation. It's a mess even if their intentions are good
I believe the data from outside the top flight is clear that it is working, I believe the data from the top level is less supportive that its working as concussions don't appear to have reduced materially. I would like to see proper data presented properly before I concluded though.
I don't think its perfect but i'm not convinced by the alternatives either. I don't know what the best solution is
-
I don't think having the TMO jabbering constantly in the ear of the ref while he runs his rule over every minor incident that occurs during play is having a positive contribution to player safety. It just makes for confusion and a shitty product for the fans. WR have to work out exactly what they are trying to achieve because they don't appear to have a clear idea right now
-
the TMO thing I see as a slightly separate subject. As I said on Saturday, in general i'm in favour of better decisions made badly over bad decisions made live but the balance does feel off. I don't like seeing a TMO bringing stuff back for a knock on in the middle of the park, I do agree it should be used for foul play but at the moment some of that stuff is too minor to be being interfered with
-
@canefan said in Red Cards & HIA:
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
@taniwharugby said in Red Cards & HIA:
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
you do that by incentivising players not to do it, therefore punishing the player, team and fans as a result.
Fixed it for you.
I largely agree with you, but I am dead against punishing the team and fans.
I mean with your statement above about training differently for these accidental contacts, where do thuggish acts sit? Because you (world rugby) are punishing the same group with the same in game sanction; player, team, fans, no one trained that.
by training to tackle lower it means that always illegal tackles (not bent at the waist etc) happen less often, the goal of which is to bring down the number of unintentional but still illegal head shots. Punishing the team means you punish the coach who loses his job if his team lose every week because the team goes down to 14 thus incentivising better coaching of the tackle, only punishing the player not the team doesn't have that impact. That's the argument made my World Rugby and has merit IMO
It's not working. How many remedial courses has Owen Farrell done and he still hits high? He's not the only one. The inconsistency of rulings, absorbing vs non absorbing tackles, mitigation. It's a mess even if their intentions are good
Precisely. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Their implementation of this is an utter disaster. It's ineffective, arbitrary and ruining the sport as a result.
If you want to change player behaviour, punish the player so they're incentivised to tackle within the laws
-
@antipodean said in Red Cards & HIA:
@canefan said in Red Cards & HIA:
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
@taniwharugby said in Red Cards & HIA:
@Dodge said in Red Cards & HIA:
you do that by incentivising players not to do it, therefore punishing the player, team and fans as a result.
Fixed it for you.
I largely agree with you, but I am dead against punishing the team and fans.
I mean with your statement above about training differently for these accidental contacts, where do thuggish acts sit? Because you (world rugby) are punishing the same group with the same in game sanction; player, team, fans, no one trained that.
by training to tackle lower it means that always illegal tackles (not bent at the waist etc) happen less often, the goal of which is to bring down the number of unintentional but still illegal head shots. Punishing the team means you punish the coach who loses his job if his team lose every week because the team goes down to 14 thus incentivising better coaching of the tackle, only punishing the player not the team doesn't have that impact. That's the argument made my World Rugby and has merit IMO
It's not working. How many remedial courses has Owen Farrell done and he still hits high? He's not the only one. The inconsistency of rulings, absorbing vs non absorbing tackles, mitigation. It's a mess even if their intentions are good
Precisely. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Their implementation of this is an utter disaster. It's ineffective, arbitrary and ruining the sport as a result.
If you want to change player behaviour, punish the player so they're incentivised to tackle within the laws
And don't weaken. I hate it when the judiciary makes a decision and then backtracks on appeal
-
@Dodge again, largely agree, but the punishment does not fit the crime.
The accident is getting the same charge as the deliberate act.
As I said, I hate cards full stop and we need to find a better way, 15 v 14/13 isnt what anyone wants to see.
