Red Cards
-
@Anonymous hard to avoid? 18 drives up from not very low, clearly going high and then his teammate hits high for good measure.
Yep
Both of the dirty fluffybunnies should have gone
-
@Anonymous hard to avoid? 18 drives up from not very low, clearly going high and then his teammate hits high for good measure.
By hard to avoid, I'm meaning without either putting himself at more risk or giving up easy metres and quick ball there's no way to completely prevent it from ever happening. Yes, of course he could have avoided it by going lower or executing better but players are going to make mistakes or misjudgements when tackling. How many similar tackles are made but are fine because there's no head contact? If you're only penalised when it goes wrong, is that going to stop players from trying to get it right?
The current approach seems to incentivise better execution rather than tackling lower. And it doesn't seem like there as been much/any improvement in execution.
-
@Anonymous said in Red Cards:
or giving up easy metres and quick ball
This is the straw man. It's the point! If you can't do something legally, it doesn't mean you can get away with doing it illegally, I don't think it's something that's hard to understand.
The alternative is saying it's ok to pull down lineout jumpers because you couldn't get the ball, ok to tackle players without the ball because otherwise they were going to do damage to your team, ok to deliberately knock a ball forward because otherwise it was going to an unmarked opposition player.
-
@Anonymous said in Red Cards:
or giving up easy metres and quick ball
This is the straw man. It's the point! If you can't do something legally, it doesn't mean you can get away with doing it illegally, I don't think it's something that's hard to understand.
The alternative is saying it's ok to pull down lineout jumpers because you couldn't get the ball, ok to tackle players without the ball because otherwise they were going to do damage to your team, ok to deliberately knock a ball forward because otherwise it was going to an unmarked opposition player.
Upvote
-
@Anonymous said in Red Cards:
or giving up easy metres and quick ball
This is the straw man. It's the point! If you can't do something legally, it doesn't mean you can get away with doing it illegally, I don't think it's something that's hard to understand.
The alternative is saying it's ok to pull down lineout jumpers because you couldn't get the ball, ok to tackle players without the ball because otherwise they were going to do damage to your team, ok to deliberately knock a ball forward because otherwise it was going to an unmarked opposition player.
At some point players are going to have to accept that conceding points/metres/possession is the only outcome available at that point in the game, and fix it at a future point in the game.
-
@Anonymous said in Red Cards:
or giving up easy metres and quick ball
This is the straw man. It's the point! If you can't do something legally, it doesn't mean you can get away with doing it illegally, I don't think it's something that's hard to understand.
The alternative is saying it's ok to pull down lineout jumpers because you couldn't get the ball, ok to tackle players without the ball because otherwise they were going to do damage to your team, ok to deliberately knock a ball forward because otherwise it was going to an unmarked opposition player.
At some point players are going to have to accept that conceding points/metres/possession is the only outcome available at that point in the game, and fix it at a future point in the game.
... And get those meters themselves.
What I would be doing is aggressively penalizing people who voluntarily drop into contact or carry low. You get protection, you don't get to carry leading with your head
-
-
@Nepia the key for me, is that we have an even contest of 15 v 15 for as much of a match as possible, I dont want to see 15 v 13/14...even if it works in my teams favour.
Do rugby players get fined for cards, they do in NRL dont they?
Obviously in a comp like the NPC where some players earn $10k for thier season, so it needs to be relative.
-
@taniwharugby said in Red Cards:
@Nepia the key for me, is that we have an even contest of 15 v 15 for as much of a match as possible, I dont want to see 15 v 13/14...even if it works in my teams favour.
Might work for your team this week, but then there's next week and the week after....
Brownlie and Meads were the only red carded All Blacks in 100+ years. Now you've got rule changes that result in three red cards in a weekend and yet some test rugby administrators are dumb enough not to have woken up that the nature of the game has been fundamentally changed.
The 20 minutes with 14 players and then replacement is obviously required.
-
I think the best option is to go on report and the player is replaced instantly and not to return. That way it stays 15v15 and the offending teams reserves come on earlier. So, you don't have a yellow or red, simply any reported player is replaced.
To avoid the player purposely getting a yellow to save a game, some sort of minimum suspension and fine might make them think twice. You could also have some sort of point penalty such as 3 points for the opposing team if your player is put on report.
Clearly the current system is broken, and an entire rethink is required because it is currently ruining the rugby product.
Doesn't basketball have this sort of system with fouls, perhaps any cynical yellows are just an instant 3 points plus an attacking scrum or kick to touch. Two fouls or cynical play and you are replaced.
-
-
-
@Kirwan it was 6...but got reduced to 4 cos.
-
@taniwharugby said in Red Cards:
@Kirwan it was 6...but got reduced to 4 cos.
It's like when my wife tells me it's on sale, the retail price is irrelevant, it's what you end up paying that is important.
-
@taniwharugby said in Red Cards:
@Kirwan it was 6...but got reduced to 4 cos.
Not much of a disincentive is it. For that sort of clear thuggery, no reductions should be made. He had so much time to pull out of that.
Was genuinely upsetting to watch Hodgman writhing on the ground after that.
-
Also 4 weeks for Scott Barretts brain implosion seems a little short to me. That was one of the worst shoulder to heads I have seen in a long time.
Very, very lucky. Should have been six months for that.
FTFY
A few weeks off in the middle of the season to rest and recovery from any minor niggles while still getting paid isn't really a punishment.
-
@Anonymous which is why I feel there should be an appropriate financial impact too...I mean many of these players are married right, imagine them having to tell the wife he got a $50k fine for being a dumb arse
