Red Cards
-
I would love to see a proper analysis on the impact of cards on the outcome of the game.
For example how many points on average are scored when a team is down a player, two players. Is this higher than without. How many teams who lose a player to red actually win a game.
If cards are having an overwhelming impact on the outcome of a game/contest then that dilutes the product for the fans and viewing public. We should be penalising the player not the fans.
My personal solution is if it's a yellow or red you simply replace the player instantly and then perhaps give the attacking team 3 points for yellow and 7 for a red. That keeps it at 15 v 15 and the contest is still alive. The risk of 3 points and a penalty so in theory could be 6 point turnaround for cynical play may deter behaviour.
Some data here.
-
I read somewhere that around 65% of concussions where actually on the tackler and not the person being tackled. So, by trying to get players to go lower are we actually placing the tackler at higher risk?
I read somewhere that around 65% of concussions where actually on the tackler and not the person being tackled. So, by trying to get players to go lower are we actually placing the tackler at higher risk?
With the vast majority of that 65% being shit tackling technique
-
@MiketheSnow said in Red Cards:
I read somewhere that around 65% of concussions where actually on the tackler and not the person being tackled. So, by trying to get players to go lower are we actually placing the tackler at higher risk?
With the vast majority of that 65% being shit tackling technique
It's an interesting point isn't it. These players are all professionals and have been for years.
They train almost daily and have more data and coaches then they have ever had. They all must have been coached the proper technique, yet they still fuck it up on a consistent basis.
This tells me they are human, and they play a very fast physical game were dominant tackles win games.
We watch slowmo after slowmo criticising the players. I bet down on the ground the margins for error are pretty slim and it is a lot harder to get right then we think. -
@MiketheSnow said in Red Cards:
I read somewhere that around 65% of concussions where actually on the tackler and not the person being tackled. So, by trying to get players to go lower are we actually placing the tackler at higher risk?
With the vast majority of that 65% being shit tackling technique
It's an interesting point isn't it. These players are all professionals and have been for years.
They train almost daily and have more data and coaches then they have ever had. They all must have been coached the proper technique, yet they still fuck it up on a consistent basis.
This tells me they are human, and they play a very fast physical game were dominant tackles win games.
We watch slowmo after slowmo criticising the players. I bet down on the ground the margins for error are pretty slim and it is a lot harder to get right then we think.@MiketheSnow said in Red Cards:
I read somewhere that around 65% of concussions where actually on the tackler and not the person being tackled. So, by trying to get players to go lower are we actually placing the tackler at higher risk?
With the vast majority of that 65% being shit tackling technique
It's an interesting point isn't it. These players are all professionals and have been for years.
They train almost daily and have more data and coaches then they have ever had. They all must have been coached the proper technique, yet they still fuck it up on a consistent basis.
This tells me they are human, and they play a very fast physical game were dominant tackles win games.
We watch slowmo after slowmo criticising the players. I bet down on the ground the margins for error are pretty slim and it is a lot harder to get right then we think.Perhaps the risk/reward of dominant tackles no longer makes it a 'winning' strategy.
The coaches and players who change their game quickest may well reap the rewards.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Red Cards:
I read somewhere that around 65% of concussions where actually on the tackler and not the person being tackled. So, by trying to get players to go lower are we actually placing the tackler at higher risk?
With the vast majority of that 65% being shit tackling technique
It's an interesting point isn't it. These players are all professionals and have been for years.
They train almost daily and have more data and coaches then they have ever had. They all must have been coached the proper technique, yet they still fuck it up on a consistent basis.
This tells me they are human, and they play a very fast physical game were dominant tackles win games.
We watch slowmo after slowmo criticising the players. I bet down on the ground the margins for error are pretty slim and it is a lot harder to get right then we think.@MiketheSnow said in Red Cards:
I read somewhere that around 65% of concussions where actually on the tackler and not the person being tackled. So, by trying to get players to go lower are we actually placing the tackler at higher risk?
With the vast majority of that 65% being shit tackling technique
It's an interesting point isn't it. These players are all professionals and have been for years.
They train almost daily and have more data and coaches then they have ever had. They all must have been coached the proper technique, yet they still fuck it up on a consistent basis.
This tells me they are human, and they play a very fast physical game were dominant tackles win games.
We watch slowmo after slowmo criticising the players. I bet down on the ground the margins for error are pretty slim and it is a lot harder to get right then we think.Or maybe what we think is good technique is not the technique that is being coached?
-
FFS.... This is more bullshit...
https://twitter.com/BMcSport/status/1518710864438001665?t=ZcXFdjBQsPbPka3zO616Iw&s=19
-
FFS.... This is more bullshit...
https://twitter.com/BMcSport/status/1518710864438001665?t=ZcXFdjBQsPbPka3zO616Iw&s=19
-
Somewhere in the explanation it mitigates his behaviour by inferring the actions of others affected the outcome....
-
Further replays seemed to indicate Chiefs teammate Angus Ta'avao assisted Cane's body going over the horizontal and contributed to the dangerous nature. After reviewing the incident, SANZAAR's Judiciary has confirmed 'the significant involvement of other players contributed to the incident', deeming it did not meet the red card threshold. -
Further replays seemed to indicate Chiefs teammate Angus Ta'avao assisted Cane's body going over the horizontal and contributed to the dangerous nature. After reviewing the incident, SANZAAR's Judiciary has confirmed 'the significant involvement of other players contributed to the incident', deeming it did not meet the red card threshold.@KiwiMurph thanks. I think they are wrong, it's a tackle technique that's been cracked down on since 2005
-
FFS.... This is more bullshit...
https://twitter.com/BMcSport/status/1518710864438001665?t=ZcXFdjBQsPbPka3zO616Iw&s=19
FFS.... This is more bullshit...
https://twitter.com/BMcSport/status/1518710864438001665?t=ZcXFdjBQsPbPka3zO616Iw&s=19
This just makes it even more confusing for the on-field ref and TMO doesn't it, like what the fuck is a red card and what isn't. That was clear driving him headfirst into the turf. Just another reason that we need a report system as clearly the panel are the experts and they should decide after the game and not ruin the actual game by reducing teams to 13 or 14 players.
-
FFS.... This is more bullshit...
https://twitter.com/BMcSport/status/1518710864438001665?t=ZcXFdjBQsPbPka3zO616Iw&s=19
This just makes it even more confusing for the on-field ref and TMO doesn't it, like what the fuck is a red card and what isn't. That was clear driving him headfirst into the turf. Just another reason that we need a report system as clearly the panel are the experts and they should decide after the game and not ruin the actual game by reducing teams to 13 or 14 players.
@chimoaus Agree with everything you've said, apart from calling the judicial panel experts. Their determinations are at odds with nearly everyone else in the rugby world.
-
-
Finau’s RC decided to be incorrect
10:40 in
What really annoys me about this is that both the ref and TMO decided he was “always high” which is clear nonsense. He is bent at the waist almost parallel to the ground. Also no consideration that the ball carrier clearly lowers his head height and “ducks”
Ref then treats the captain like a naughty kid with a little come here lecture.
Hope there was an apology.Clear camera work, clear mitigation, bad decision making with lots of time to get it right.
These are the ones you fear in a big match.
