Red card replacements for new Rainbow Cup (Rule Changes Discussion)

[TobesHodges]

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/56763899

Bold Rule Changes

Teams in the inaugural Rainbow Cup will be able to replace players who are sent off under trial laws being brought in for the tournament.

Captains will be allowed one challenge per game to review try-scoring and foul play up to the 75th minute.
In the last five minutes a captain can challenge any decision, provided he has not made a previous challenge.

In addition, when attackers are held up over the try-line, the defending team will drop out from their goal-line.

The rule will also apply to in-goal knock-ons and when defenders ground the ball from attacking kicks.

Under existing laws, attacking teams are awarded a scrum five metres from the opposition try-line when they are held up.

When a player is sent off, his team will be down to 14 men for 20 minutes before he can be replaced by another player.

The three experimental laws have already been used in New Zealand's Super Rugby Aotearoa and the Australian version of the competition.

World Rugby chief executive Alan Gilpin said: "We applaud Pro14 Rugby and the respective clubs for their enthusiasm to trial a number of law variations in the Rainbow Cup.

"The addition of another top competition to the World Rugby law trials programme will provide invaluable data and feedback to determine future advances to game spectacle and player welfare."

Pro14 tournament director David Jordan said in the statement announcing the trial laws: "We know these laws also have their origins from the player welfare symposiums and our belief is that we will see a positive impact on the game overall."

The Rainbow Cup - involving teams from Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Italy and South Africa - starts on Friday, 23 April, with derby games in the five countries in the opening three rounds.

Ulster host Connacht on the opening night while in Wales Cardiff Blues travel to Ospreys the following day.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Why the hell are they trying to ruin our game at every given opportunity. A red card means get off the pitch and be down to 14 men. That's the point of it being red!!!

Stupid stupid stupid people ******* up our game.

 

[Jimcardiff]

So red for violent or dangerous play is now reduced , thats not good for player welfare in my opinion

 

[Owen#2]

totally pointless. red should mean off and thats it.

 

[Derpus]

Theyve been using this rule in SR aus and ao and its been great.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Theyve been using this rule in SR aus and ao and its been great.

Great why? So the average spectator isn't turned off rugby but everyone else wants players to just obey the laws and not hurt people?

 

[Derpus]

Great why? So the average spectator isn't turned off rugby but everyone else wants players to just obey the laws and not hurt people?

I think its a good compromise. Red cards are far more prevalent these days and they usually result from poor individual technique.

The individual gets the same punishment as always but the teams punishment is lessened, and the game isnt completely ruined.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I think its a good compromise. Red cards are far more prevalent these days and they usually result from poor individual technique.

The individual gets the same punishment as always but the teams punishment is lessened, and the game isnt completely ruined.

But the individual technique is often because the team are being put on the back foot or under pressure.

Players, coaches, teams just need to work better on technique and then they won't get reds. Tackles have got higher and higher and players bigger and bigger. Something needs to give before we really hurt someone.

 

[Derpus]

But the individual technique is often because the team are being put on the back foot or under pressure.

Players, coaches, teams just need to work better on technique and then they won't get reds. Tackles have got higher and higher and players bigger and bigger. Something needs to give before we really hurt someone.

Meh. Being banned for 6 weeks is sufficient deterrent to work on technique.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Meh. Being banned for 6 weeks is sufficient deterrent to work on technique.

I don't agree with the long band ironically though lol

 

[Derpus]

I don't agree with the long band ironically though lol

So youd rather a short ban but more games ended prematurely? Not sure thats gunna fly with many unions.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

So youd rather a short ban but more games ended prematurely? Not sure thats gunna fly with many unions.

Shorter ban yes, but red means red and the team is down to 14 for the duration.

 

[Derpus]

Shorter ban yes, but red means red and the team is down to 14 for the duration.

I think that's regressive, if anything. Happy with how we are doing it at the moment. I think its been broadly a success and would be surprised if it wasnt continued.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

I think that's regressive, if anything. Happy with how we are doing it at the moment. I think its been broadly a success and would be surprised if it wasnt continued.

You mean you've down graded the red to a long yellow and it's made the game better to watch for you.

Probably not a good thing over all for players or the game.

 

[Derpus]

You mean you've down graded the red to a long yellow and it's made the game better to watch for you.

Probably not a good thing over all for players or the game.

No - please go back and re-read our conversation.

 

[RedruthRFC]

The individual gets the same punishment as always but the teams punishment is lessened, and the game isnt completely ruined.

Who is the arbiter of when a red card ruins a game? I don't feel like it happens nearly as often as popular wisdom tells us (quite the opposite sometimes) and also wonder how this arbiter knows how entertaining the game would have been without the red card.

 

[ncurd]

My major complaint is when they are given late in the game and the team being punished aren't punished enough.

 

[RedruthRFC]

My major complaint is when they are given late in the game and the team being punished aren't punished enough.

It sounds like something that our resigent semi-troll would suggest, but I've said the same in the past. I don't know what the solution is, but it's weird that the sancation for an offence in the first minute of the game is 79 times harsher than the penalty for an identical offence in the last minute.

 

[ncurd]

It sounds like something that our resigent semi-troll would suggest, but I've said the same in the past. I don't know what the solution is, but it's weird that the sancation for an offence in the first minute of the game is 79 times harsher than the penalty for an identical offence in the last minute.

Yeah there is no sensible solution it's just one of those things that galls. Mainly cynical yellow card offences in the dying throes of the game when they are stopping a side going for the win.

Whilst I don't think there is a sensible solution I'd rather they focus on that than worrying about red card offenders.

 

[TobesHodges]

I actually think the way the NRL deal with things is great i.e. Putting contentious decisions on report and dealing with them after the game, not only does this keep the game flowing, which at the moment i think games are stopped for far to long during matches for any kind of decision, it allows things that have conjecture in the heat of the game to be viewed and concluded more reasonably. I think Union is way behind the curve compared to NRL I hate to say.