Red Cards
-
Kahui is free to play in Hamilton. Another example of the judiciary disagreeing with the ref.
Former All Black Richard Kahui will be free to play in his Hamilton homecoming after his contentious red card for a high tackle on Highlanders first five-eighth Mitch Hunt was dismissed. In a hearing on Tuesday night, Sanzaar’s judicial committee said Kahui’s tackle was worthy a yellow card but mitigating circumstances lowered the incident from a red.
The hearing heard by Mike Mika (chair), David Croft and Chris Smith ruled that Kahui had lowered himself into the tackle and the contact on Hunt was neither intentional nor highly reckless. "Having conducted a detailed review of all the available evidence, including all camera angles and additional evidence, including from the player, a medical report on the opposition player involved, and having considered the submissions from his legal representative, Michael Tudori. The judicial committee found that the player had not committed an act of foul play worthy of the red card threshold,” Mika said.
“The judicial committee reviewed the case in accordance with Reg 17.16.1 of World Rugby's regulations and the World Rugby Head Contact Process. “The evidence and submissions on behalf of the player, together with surrounding circumstances, satisfied the Committee that there was mitigation to lower the incident from red card to a yellow card. Whilst the incident is dangerous, the contact with the head was not intentional or highly reckless. Kahui was shown to be lowering himself for the tackle on the right-hand side of the opposing player when a significant movement from the ball carrier meant that the late change in direction contributed to head contact.” -
Jesus it's a joke, refs, world rugby, and judiciary need to decide what the laws are. Cos the same thing got a few weeks off in NH last month. I don't care too much what the laws are, but just some consistency in application would be appreciated
-
@Machpants it's too hard to apply a complex system accurately and consistently in the heat of the moment. It's just not feasible.
They need to move to a system where the primary disincentive is decided after the game. It also needs to be more serious. Bigger bans and bigger fines for offences deemed red.
-
lol fucking hell
The problem we have down here seems to be, the refs are working under the rule "if you hit him in the head, you're off" while the judiciary is looking at everything and saying 'yep, hit him in the head, but not all your fault"
And that, right there, is a disgraceful way of handling it.
The NH seem to have the refs and judiciary on the same side?
FWIW i agree with the judicial way of looking at, but that's just my opinion. What i hugely disagree with, and is proving massively unfair to teams, spectators, and the refs, is the two arms being on different pages.
-
@mariner4life presume you're referring to Kahui's Red being overturned.
honestly, the judiciary are a lottery. It's bizarre.
-
honestly, the judiciary are a lottery. It's bizarre.
not sure they are? seems they are pretty consistent. This is now the 2nd one overturned for pretty much the same reason?
It's just they are not saying what the refs are saying. Of course they have a lot more time to look at things, don't have external pressures mounting on them the more they look at stuff. And apparently zero accountability (well, publicly anyway).
-
@Derpus do they currently get fined?
But I agree otherwise, refs have enough pressure on them, without having to make these decisions out there, and ultimately being undermined by a technicality or people with more time on thier hands to make these decisions
@chimoaus yep, take these decisions away from the refs who need to make them with the time constraints in the game, while looking at a big screen and the TMO making a ruling, and they so often get them wrong, I mean ref sees one thing, TMO sees another, one has to back down, and maybe I'm hearing what I want to hear, but often you hear one or the other not overly confident on the ruling the other is asking/confirming.
I mean given these guys careers are on the line, should Kahui now be given compensation or an apology from the ref (I dont think he should, but is this the path we are heading along?)
It is akin (on the less serious scale obviously) to being arrested for something, chucked in the slammer for the night, released only to have charges dropped...
-
And in the mean time we have games altered by red cards and Grumpy Old pricks like me giving up on games.
-
@mariner4life said in Red Cards:
honestly, the judiciary are a lottery. It's bizarre.
not sure they are? seems they are pretty consistent. This is now the 2nd one overturned for pretty much the same reason?
Whose is the second? T he tahs prop who lifted early in the game?
I really feel for the refs; not being supported by the judiciary must be soul destroying.
-
The interesting thing here is that the judicial committee's interpretation of what happened was the same as mine using the same footage O'Keeffe and his ARs used. So the refs need a clear explanation of what is mitigation because they can't even agree amongst themselves.
-
@mariner4life said in Red Cards:
honestly, the judiciary are a lottery. It's bizarre.
not sure they are? seems they are pretty consistent. This is now the 2nd one overturned for pretty much the same reason?
Whose is the second? T he tahs prop who lifted early in the game?
I really feel for the refs; not being supported by the judiciary must be soul destroying.
dude, don't ask me for specifics, some nerd will provide those i am sure
With regards to the refs not being supported, if they are not correct, then their ruling should be overturned. My concern is more that there does not seem to be the communication between the refereeing body, and the judiciary. Both are consistent, just consistently different.
-
If I can find the time over the next few days, I'll be the nerd to have a look at in which cases, what kind of offences, red cards imposed (or not imposed!) by which refs, have lead to decisions from the Judiciairy which are different from those of officials.
Edit: Super Rugby Pacific only
-
@Stargazer said in Red Cards:
If I can find the time over the next few days, I'll be the nerd to have a look at in which cases, what kind of offences, red cards imposed (or not imposed!) by which refs, have lead to decisions from the Judiciairy which are different from those of officials.
Edit: Super Rugby Pacific only
At least 50% of Pickerell's game decisions are overturned by fans.
-
@mariner4life said in Red Cards:
@mariner4life said in Red Cards:
honestly, the judiciary are a lottery. It's bizarre.
not sure they are? seems they are pretty consistent. This is now the 2nd one overturned for pretty much the same reason?
Whose is the second? T he tahs prop who lifted early in the game?
I really feel for the refs; not being supported by the judiciary must be soul destroying.
dude, don't ask me for specifics, some nerd will provide those i am sure
With regards to the refs not being supported, if they are not correct, then their ruling should be overturned. My concern is more that there does not seem to be the communication between the refereeing body, and the judiciary. Both are consistent, just consistently different.
I would be very surprised if there is no communication between the refereeing people and the judiciary people. I am thinking the framework the players, the refs, and judiciary are expected to operate under are just not workable in the real world.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in Red Cards:
@mariner4life said in Red Cards:
@mariner4life said in Red Cards:
honestly, the judiciary are a lottery. It's bizarre.
not sure they are? seems they are pretty consistent. This is now the 2nd one overturned for pretty much the same reason?
Whose is the second? T he tahs prop who lifted early in the game?
I really feel for the refs; not being supported by the judiciary must be soul destroying.
dude, don't ask me for specifics, some nerd will provide those i am sure
With regards to the refs not being supported, if they are not correct, then their ruling should be overturned. My concern is more that there does not seem to be the communication between the refereeing body, and the judiciary. Both are consistent, just consistently different.
I would be very surprised if there is no communication between the refereeing people and the judiciary people. I am thinking the framework the players, the refs, and judiciary are expected to operate under are just not workable in the real world.
that's probably a very fair point
imagine being a ref, looking at a screen, with crowd going fucking nuts in the background, conscious of the time being taken, looking at a very short clip being played at very slow speed, captains standing just away saying opposite things. You've got a framework, but it's a little vague, and you know that your decision could decide the entire shape of the game.
fuck that noise.
-
@mariner4life then, you make the call, and the Judiciary aint got your back!
Take the decision away from the match day officials except for grub acts (kicking, punching, biting etc)
-
@Stargazer I am interested in how many Red cards get overturned or downgraded. Do they ever upgrade from yellow to red?
If the 4 refs on the day only get it right say 60% of the time then 40% of the time a team is disadvantaged unfairly by being a man down for potentially 10 extra minutes and then losing that player.
Should professional teams and athletes have to put up with the incorrect decision being made even 10% of the time if you know what I mean.
I would also be interested if cards have any impact on the outcome of a game. I guess the timing of the card is important here, early reds might have more impact than late for example.
-
