Jump to content

Rugby Union


kiwififer

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

New law reform being introduced on a trial basis

Red card will see the player out for the rest of the game but their team can replace them after 20 minutes 

that is the one trial laws i don't fully agree with. I am ok with a player getting subbed after red for 2 yellows. But a player  getting a straight red should not be able to get replaced 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ajwffc said:

that is the one trial laws i don't fully agree with. I am ok with a player getting subbed after red for 2 yellows. But a player  getting a straight red should not be able to get replaced 

As you say, the big issue with it is that there are grey areas in red card offences. 2 yellows for killing the ball =/= getting your timing wrong on a challenge in the air =/= levelling a guy in the head with your shoulder at full tilt and so on.

For me though, it comes down to the simple rule of "if you don't want sent off, don't take the risk of committing the offence", and grading of red card should be dealt with in the suspension process, rather than during the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, honestly united said:

I think it makes a bit of a mockery of the game, especially when you have a campaign to stop subs being made apart from injuries. Its just more bringing fresh legs on and doesnt really punish the team who take the red card, as they will just waste time until they get the man back

In practice the current set up means that one stupid offence can see you team a man down for anything between a trivial 1 minute and a game costing 79 minutes so this at least makes things more consistent and will probably mean more early red card offences actually  get red cards from referees, especially at lower levels of the game

It’s an experimental change though so the IRB will have the option of making it 25 or 30 minutes if 20 doesn’t seem enough 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ajwffc said:

two teenagers (one 14 year old and one 15 year old) arrested with one being charged with attempted murder. 

https://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/news/12321/12383493/toutai-kefu-australian-world-cup-winner-recovering-well-after-violent-attack

Courier-Mail reporting a 13 year old also arrested and appears to have been the driver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/08/2021 at 09:16, Mark Connolly said:

As you say, the big issue with it is that there are grey areas in red card offences. 2 yellows for killing the ball =/= getting your timing wrong on a challenge in the air =/= levelling a guy in the head with your shoulder at full tilt and so on.

For me though, it comes down to the simple rule of "if you don't want sent off, don't take the risk of committing the offence", and grading of red card should be dealt with in the suspension process, rather than during the game.

 

On 15/08/2021 at 10:05, honestly united said:

I think it makes a bit of a mockery of the game, especially when you have a campaign to stop subs being made apart from injuries. Its just more bringing fresh legs on and doesnt really punish the team who take the red card, as they will just waste time until they get the man back

These changes are basically an admission that they’ve messed up the red card rules.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Savage Henry said:

 

These changes are basically an admission that they’ve messed up the red card rules.  

I think its sending out the wrong message though, on the one hand they are talking about player safety, reducing any contact to the head etc which has increased red cards, then on the other hand they are now saying we aren't penalising teams as they can bring a player back on after 20 minutes.

On the one hand I agree that some of the red cards are extremly harsh (ie if Kolbe had been red carded for the Murray incident it would have been extremley harsh as it was accidental and he probably didnt see Murray jump for the ball, but letter of the law he could have gone) where as others are blatant reds, ie the French lad punching Ritchie, or O'Mahony's shoulder to the Welsh players head. For the first you can see its fair enough that after 20 mins they can come back on, but in the other I would be raging.

Imagine if someone deliberatly took Russel out with a high tackle and Russel had to go off with a concussion, and 20 minutes later we are still without our best player, but the opposition are back to 15 men, you would be raging.

If they had maybe added an orange card (or maybe something less staunch as that would probably upset the Irish) for incidents that are technically sending offs, then keep the red for proper foul play would be a better system.

ie Yellow, 10 minutes sin bin, then back on

Orange, 20 minutes sin bin, then a sub comes on in your place

Red, off for rest of the game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, honestly united said:

 

On the one hand I agree that some of the red cards are extremly harsh (ie if Kolbe had been red carded for the Murray incident it would have been extremley harsh as it was accidental and he probably didnt see Murray jump for the ball, but letter of the law he could have gone)

Nah, this is one where I get really fucked off.

The Kolbe incident was dangerous because he didn't see Murray jump for the ball, and that's the main reason he should have seen red. He had no concept of what was around him, which endangered the other player, and he was extremely lucky it didn't end in a red, a serious injury to Murray (or indeed himself) or any combination of those.

They are constantly talking about players having responsibility for the safety of opponents when making a tackle, but that doesn't seem to apply in the air. It's fucking nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:

Nah, this is one where I get really fucked off.

The Kolbe incident was dangerous because he didn't see Murray jump for the ball, and that's the main reason he should have seen red. He had no concept of what was around him, which endangered the other player, and he was extremely lucky it didn't end in a red, a serious injury to Murray (or indeed himself) or any combination of those.

They are constantly talking about players having responsibility for the safety of opponents when making a tackle, but that doesn't seem to apply in the air. It's fucking nonsense.

I wonder if its a different era thing, but I was always taught to keep your eye on the ball and dont worry about whats going on around you.

When Murray jumps he has more chance of seeing Kolbe than the other way round, why is there no duty on care on the jumper - see also leading with the knee / foot - you shouldn't be able to just jump at people and expect them to move for you. You cant jump into a tackle for your own safety, just because the balls in the air why is it any different to recklessly jump at people - if they outlawed jumping it would reduce the needless red cards, and maybe even stop teams kicking every single ball they get

Spoiler

Murray being a cheating Irish player would definitly jump into someone to try and get them sent off :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, honestly united said:

I wonder if its a different era thing, but I was always taught to keep your eye on the ball and dont worry about whats going on around you.

When Murray jumps he has more chance of seeing Kolbe than the other way round, why is there no duty on care on the jumper - see also leading with the knee / foot - you shouldn't be able to just jump at people and expect them to move for you. You cant jump into a tackle for your own safety, just because the balls in the air why is it any different to recklessly jump at people - if they outlawed jumping it would reduce the needless red cards, and maybe even stop teams kicking every single ball they get

  Reveal hidden contents

Murray being a cheating Irish player would definitly jump into someone to try and get them sent off :D

 

I don't disagree with your argument that players in the air should be in control (see Dan Biggar jumping through Finn Russell a few years back).

The idea that you just look at the ball and nothing else is definitely long gone, and rightly so tbh. The same arguments you make for the player in the air would apply on the ground, you wouldn't be allowed to run through someone without the ball just because you are looking at it.

The easiest way is to ping the guy who created the danger - if you hurtle through the air and land on a guy (or go through one!) who was minding his own business and already in the space you are travelling through, you get pinged. If you wipe out a guy who is in control of his jump while he is in the air, you get pinged.

As with everything else, if refs enforce the laws properly, behaviour has to and will change. Despite World Rugby's claims that "Player safety is paramount", they are still playing at it in a number of the most dangerous areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've just realised that there are Super Six games live on free telly - in fact not just one but two: Friday evenings on the BBC Sport website and Sunday afternoon on Freesports. Hate the names of some of the teams but still good to see some coverage of Scottish rugby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...