RugbyRebels

The red card meant that the French galvanised in the second half, once they got used to being a man down, and by then, the test was already decided so the All Blacks lost structure.

Poor performance, but it was what it was.


Also, the ref got it right regarding the red card, and I do wonder if we'd be having this same discussion if it the roles were reversed.

cashead wrote:The red card meant that the French galvanised in the second half, once they got used to being a man down, and by then, the test was already decided so the All Blacks lost structure.

Poor performance, but it was what it was.


Also, the ref got it right regarding the red card, and I do wonder if we'd be having this same discussion if it the roles were reversed.

I’m not sure anybody thinks the ref got it wrong. More the law is wrong.

I'd agree with the general consensus that the law is wrong here, or more specifically the punishment. In fact, the whole idea of yellow and red cards needs to be revisited. This is not soccer. Rugby has much more in common with American football, and that game has a very effective means of dealing with foul play - yardage loss. They don't even award penalties! While a player would only ever be sent off (ejected, they call it) for fighting or suchlike, which is completely unacceptable on the gridiron. But American football is all about yardage and even the most serious offenses are punished in this manner. No send offs. No shots at goal. & it is amazingly effective.

Fall’s red has been rescinded. Looks worryingly like common sense.

I had eyes on the ball is yet another new standard

Fucking bullshit.

Hey, glance at the ball in the air guys! It's OK to sweep the leaping player's legs out from underneath him when he's in midair and has no control! Concussions? Broken necks! FUCK THAT SHIT! IT'S COMMON SENSE! RULES? SHIT ON THEM! Player welfare? Fuck you, you PC cunt!

According to World Rugby - ramming your shoulder into Barrett's head when he's on the ground is basically OK, and you can tip him over if he leaps up for the ball. If he gets a concussion, all the better! It's common sense after all. The World Rugby will publicly give you a slobbery blowjob if you get red carded for it to make up for he inconvenience.

And fuck player welfare, it's common sense, guys! Why don't we just fucking shoot them in the foot! IT'S COMMON SENSE!

And so on and so forth.

World Rugby: We can't throw a ref that follows the law to the letter under the bus fast enough, but we will adhere to the code of Omerta when a ref fucks up a Lions series by shitting the bed on a simple call. Laws of the game? Fuck that shit, it's for bitches.

rowan wrote: But American football is all about yardage and even the most serious offenses are punished in this manner. No send offs. No shots at goal. & it is amazingly effective.

Very effective Vs what intended outcome.

It's a game of stoppages anyway so the interventions matter less, but also despite there being loads of match officials (I don't know the number or what they call them) there are still crap loads of those yellow bean bags thrown into play in every game I've ever seen suggesting players offend all the time. And I'd contend players offending all the time doesn't suggest you're getting a desired outcome.

Also players will happily illegally slow play, remove/reduce a contest for the ball and so on in rugby when they know there's a sanction of loss of ball, 40-50m in territory and even 3 points against them, how does removing card sanctions help that scenario?

(For the avoidance of doubt I'm not genuinely asking for a response, I'm only suggesting your post is stupid)

Yellow flags are only to indicate an infringement has occurred - like the incessant peep of the rugby referee's whistle. Anyway, I'm talking about the punishments, not the signalling, and only attempting to provide a little food for thought. What does seem stupid to me (and many others, evidently) is the card system that was introduced to rugby around the time it turned professional. So what is also stupid - as well as narrow-minded and arrogant - is an unwillingness to consider alternatives. Yardage penalties seem to work much better in American football than the card system does in rugby. & games are never spoiled by one team having a numerical advantage over the other. & American football is the optimum in terms of successful spectator sports. So perhaps rugby could learn something from it; & that's all I'm saying.

American football also has more early onset dementia and degenerative brain atrophy, so that’s fun.

rowan wrote:Yellow flags are only to indicate an infringement has occurred - like the incessant peep of the rugby referee's whistle. Anyway, I'm talking about the punishments, not the signalling, and only attempting to provide a little food for thought. What does seem stupid to me (and many others, evidently) is the card system that was introduced to rugby around the time it turned professional. So what is also stupid - as well as narrow-minded and arrogant - is an unwillingness to consider alternatives. Yardage penalties seem to work much better in American football than the card system does in rugby. & games are never spoiled by one team having a numerical advantage over the other. & American football is the optimum in terms of successful spectator sports. So perhaps rugby could learn something from it; & that's all I'm saying.

Might work in league where there is a tackle count, but they just boot the ball downfield and chuck it in there with not contest so it is happening already.

I don't think people have too much of a problem with the cards. Even the interpretation of the rules is not too bad. It is just that there are a couple of rules that seem fine on paper, but look daft when they occur in play. Finn Russell for instance. He is not allowed to be ready to catch the ball it seems because someone else want to jump into that space.

I'm sure there are better examples of this. If you are under a ball and don't need to run to get to it, you get no protection from a knee to the face from someone jumping with a run up. In fact, once you have collected your teeth you probably get to carry them to the bin for 10 mins.

Blimey. That’s quite some meltdown.

canta_brian wrote:

rowan wrote:Yellow flags are only to indicate an infringement has occurred - like the incessant peep of the rugby referee's whistle. Anyway, I'm talking about the punishments, not the signalling, and only attempting to provide a little food for thought. What does seem stupid to me (and many others, evidently) is the card system that was introduced to rugby around the time it turned professional. So what is also stupid - as well as narrow-minded and arrogant - is an unwillingness to consider alternatives. Yardage penalties seem to work much better in American football than the card system does in rugby. & games are never spoiled by one team having a numerical advantage over the other. & American football is the optimum in terms of successful spectator sports. So perhaps rugby could learn something from it; & that's all I'm saying.

Might work in league where there is a tackle count, but they just boot the ball downfield and chuck it in there with not contest so it is happening already.

I don't think people have too much of a problem with the cards. Even the interpretation of the rules is not too bad. It is just that there are a couple of rules that seem fine on paper, but look daft when they occur in play. Finn Russell for instance. He is not allowed to be ready to catch the ball it seems because someone else want to jump into that space.

I'm sure there are better examples of this. If you are under a ball and don't need to run to get to it, you get no protection from a knee to the face from someone jumping with a run up. In fact, once you have collected your teeth you probably get to carry them to the bin for 10 mins.

Sure, I was just trying to throw in a bit of food for thought. I know all about NFL's drawbacks and why non-Americans are often turned off by the game, but they do seem to have the formula right with discipline. Controversies are usually over minor technicalities like is it a catch if the receiver hits the ground before having 100% control of the ball?

Which Tyler wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

canta_brian wrote:As a law it seems poorly devised. Often you have a defender static under the ball in a position to catch. The attacking player is moving quickly and jumps from distance. Should the defender move back and then run at the ball to allow an equal jump? Otherwise you are getting sent off simply for existing in the space under the ball that the attacker jumps into.

Yep, silly law. I don’t like that the sanction is based on outcome with little regard for intention.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again; but the penalty should be shown to the man who created the dangerous situation. If the defender is in place, and you jump into him, that's your own bloody fault, even if you go off on a stretcher

That seems fair. That Russell suspension was about as angry as I have been about a citing panel decision (not just because we were left with Pete Horne and Duncan Weir)

This sets a fucked up precedent in which a legitimate red card was overruled by histrionics and entitlement. World Rugby had a chance to reinforce their stance on concussions but buckled like a belt.

So the next time a player gets tipped over and gets concussed, I guess all he needs to do is whine about it long enough. Or is World Rugby signalling open season on All Blacks, like they did with McCaw?

Poor little All Blacks