What can WR do about Red Cards ruining games for the fans?

[Bean]

I think the first rule should be; If you're going to hand out a Yellow or Red, you must seek the advice of the video ref.

 

[duncanb]

I think the first rule should be; If you're going to hand out a Yellow or Red, you must seek the advice of the

Why?

 

[Scotty]

I think the first rule should be; If you're going to hand out a Yellow or Red, you must seek the advice of the video ref.

Stupid idea, if something is a obvious red or yellow then why slow the game down for the sake of it, any doubt then yes bit not every time.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Stupid idea, if something is a obvious red or yellow then why slow the game down for the sake of it, any doubt then yes bit not every time.

Because what may appear an obvious yellow / red may not be upon further inspection - think Luke Pearce.

 

[Scotty]

Because what may appear an obvious yellow / red may not be upon further inspection - think Luke Pearce.

I get your point but making it mandatory would waste alot of time when a guy clearly knocked it forward with no realistic chance of catching it, deliberate knock on no review needed, pen YC, no issue

Ok red card it makes sense but not yellow

 

[Kiwiwomble]

i really wish we hadn't drifted into "deliberate" knock downs, bit of a pet peeve if mine in so far as its another thing we've found a reason to give penalties and cards for.

IMHO most of the time it comes down to the attacking team has just left it too late to make their pass and the defensive line is up. i honestly don't think it should be a penalty, if they don't regather then the attacking team is going to get an attacking scrum because of the knock on, generally that's about as much advantage as i think it deserves.

We really need to look at any of the rules that require interpretation of what was going to happen in the future, we've basically taken the old penalty try approach (which it mind memory everyone complained "how can you predict what was going to happen") and applied to loads of things.

"he was never going to regather that!"....how often do we say things like i never though he was going to do that after someone does something spectacular?

or that knock down had an overlap and so its a yellow card....i would say one 1 or 2 in 10 overlaps directly results in a try and yet we're that deserves 10 mins without a player?

If the defense wants to come up with an arm out trying to stop the pass i'd rather see the attacker looking for that and just blow past the inside shoulder as that tackle is going to be less effective

rant over

 

[Scotty]

i really wish we hadn't drifted into "deliberate" knock downs, bit of a pet peeve if mine in so far as its another thing we've found a reason to give penalties and cards for.

IMHO most of the time it comes down to the attacking team has just left it too late to make their pass and the defensive line is up. i honestly don't think it should be a penalty, if they don't regather then the attacking team is going to get an attacking scrum because of the knock on, generally that's about as much advantage as i think it deserves.

We really need to look at any of the rules that require interpretation of what was going to happen in the future, we've basically taken the old penalty try approach (which it mind memory everyone complained "how can you predict what was going to happen") and applied to loads of things.

"he was never going to regather that!"....how often do we say things like i never though he was going to do that after someone does something spectacular?

or that knock down had an overlap and so its a yellow card....i would say one 1 or 2 in 10 overlaps directly results in a try and yet we're that deserves 10 mins without a player?

If the defense wants to come up with an arm out trying to stop the pass i'd rather see the attacker looking for that and just blow past the inside shoulder as that tackle is going to be less effective

rant over

I disagree, its simple if they knock on with one hand in a downward motion and dont regether its a deliberate knock on and deserves and penalty, if its a real chance at a try or advantage its a yellow, if there is no question that the try is scored its yellow and pen try.

If he knocks the ball up and has a chance at catching it then its just a knock on. Unless its with one hand and no realistic chance, its the risk they run.

I hate to see an opportunity to see a brilliant try ruined by someone who has no chance at the intercept, dont get me wrong its great to see it pulled off.

Play needs to go on to see if it was a realistic chance, he knocks it forward but dives to regather it fair play even if it was with one hand he knocked it forward to stop the spectacular ones being punished. Cant have refs blowing to early, only pen/card/PT after he hasnt regathered at that point the sanction is decided not just because he knocked it down.

Id like to see them have the vision to see the intercept in advance and step on the inside too or keep the ball but tbh not the point, we are talking when it does go wrong for the man trying to intercept.

 

[Reiser99]

On the subject of coming back from a yellow early, looking at the hockey rule, it seems to work because the sin bin is very short at 2 minutes and there doesn't seem to be many goals scored. Where as for rugby 10 minutes is a longer time and to have a player come back after a minute because the opposition take a quick tap and score immediately would be ridiculous.

Some one suggested twenty minutes for a red and ten for a yellow, how about halving them both so yellow is 5 mins? Is that long enough? If the idea is to separate dangerous and unfair play, then dangerous play would still have the same sin bin time with the addition of the playing not coming back and then the yellow sin bin would still leave the team a man down, but not completely handicap them for an eighth of the game.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

I disagree, its simple if they knock on with one hand in a downward motion and dont regether its a deliberate knock on and deserves and penalty, if its a real chance at a try or advantage its a yellow, if there is no question that the try is scored its yellow and pen try.

If he knocks the ball up and has a chance at catching it then its just a knock on. Unless its with one hand and no realistic chance, its the risk they run.

I hate to see an opportunity to see a brilliant try ruined by someone who has no chance at the intercept, dont get me wrong its great to see it pulled off.

Play needs to go on to see if it was a realistic chance, he knocks it forward but dives to regather it fair play even if it was with one hand he knocked it forward to stop the spectacular ones being punished. Cant have refs blowing to early, only pen/card/PT after he hasnt regathered at that point the sanction is decided not just because he knocked it down.

Id like to see them have the vision to see the intercept in advance and step on the inside too or keep the ball but tbh not the point, we are talking when it does go wrong for the man trying to intercept.

if they we're being that generous then i might agree but thats not how its being officiated (in NZ anyway). Twice last year otago had yellow and penalty tries awarded against them for "deliberate" knock on, both flicks very much in the up direction. the first bounced off another attacker away the the "interceptor" and so he couldn't regather and the second he flicked it a bit too hard, full length dive, got both hands too it but not enough to control it. both PT's and both yellows, feedback was more or less you actually DO have to regather or you're more than likely going to get pinged.

or the highlanders game a few weeks ago, aaron smith gets done for a deliberate knock on on about our ten meter line, once again it bounced off another attacker so he didnt have a chance to regather, yellow card because they had a 1 man overlap....still 40m to run though, about 20min later in the same game one of the warratahs does pretty much the same thing on there 22 (so much closer to the line)....no obvious overlap so just a penalty.

just seems like too many if buts or maybes, decisions to be made and the more decisions to be made the more room for different interpretations

i guess i find penalties and cards less entertaining than things like a knock down, id rather just give the scrum or even a free kick if they'd rather "do a move" close to the line and get on with it

 

[Reiser99]

if they we're being that generous then i might agree but thats not how its being officiated (in NZ anyway). Twice last year otago had yellow and penalty tries awarded against them for "deliberate" knock on, both flicks very much in the up direction. the first bounced off another attacker away the the "interceptor" and so he couldn't regather and the second he flicked it a bit too hard, full length dive, got both hands too it but not enough to control it. both PT's and both yellows, feedback was more or less you actually DO have to regather or you're more than likely going to get pinged.

or the highlanders game a few weeks ago, aaron smith gets done for a deliberate knock on on about our ten meter line, once again it bounced off another attacker so he didnt have a chance to regather, yellow card because they had a 1 man overlap....still 40m to run though, about 20min later in the same game one of the warratahs does pretty much the same thing on there 22 (so much closer to the line)....no obvious overlap so just a penalty.

just seems like too many if buts or maybes, decisions to be made and the more decisions to be made the more room for different interpretations

i guess i find penalties and cards less entertaining than things like a knock down, id rather just give the scrum or even a free kick if they'd rather "do a move" close to the line and get on with it

The problem with that is that it can then be abused as long as people hit it up. For me there are 3 types of knock on's in this situation.

One where they genuinely have a chance to catch the ball mid pass straight away and drop it. Knock on simple.
Second where players hit it up and attempt to regather. For me they know the risk and that if they don't hit it up right they won't have a chance to regather. This is a risk the players take and should just be a penalty. If the pass would have led to a try then penalty try.
Third where they slap it down or just stick a hand out to disrupt the ball. Penalty and YC. If it would have led to a try then penalty try.

Edit: The only grey area is what constitutes a genuine attempt to catch the ball if they knock it up. Some hit it up so badly that they never would have regathered ever.

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

On the subject of coming back from a yellow early, looking at the hockey rule, it seems to work because the sin bin is very short at 2 minutes and there doesn't seem to be many goals scored. Where as for rugby 10 minutes is a longer time and to have a player come back after a minute because the opposition take a quick tap and score immediately would be ridiculous.

Some one suggested twenty minutes for a red and ten for a yellow, how about halving them both so yellow is 5 mins? Is that long enough? If the idea is to separate dangerous and unfair play, then dangerous play would still have the same sin bin time with the addition of the playing not coming back and then the yellow sin bin would still leave the team a man down, but not completely handicap them for an eighth of the game.

in hockey we have minute majors which you can't come back if the other team scores... I think that's more anagoulous to a yellow than 2 min minor

Fk/scrum= technical infraction
Pk= 2 min minor
Yellow= major
Red= game misconduct

For intentional knock ons I think ruining attacking movements with cynical play ruins the game more than yellow cards.

Without yellows, I think we'd see a lot more professional fouls in general.

 

[Reiser99]

in hockey we have minute majors which you can't come back if the other team scores... I think that's more anagoulous to a yellow than 2 min minor

Fk/scrum= technical infraction
Pk= 2 min minor
Yellow= major
Red= game misconduct

For intentional knock ons I think ruining attacking movements with cynical play ruins the game more than yellow cards.

Without yellows, I think we'd see a lot more professional fouls in general.

Sorry for my poor knowledge of hockey, but what are the sanctions for a technical infraction, yellow and red? On the face of it, it seems similar to the 4 levels that smartcooky is proposing as he doesn't mention fk/scrum infractions, but they would still be there.

 

[smartcooky]

Almost.

We can all agree that red cards can kill a game like it did on Saturday. What Im saying just adds to that. It doesn't have to be the All Blacks. It can be any team. As soon as you lose a player for over a whole half, you are almost certain to lose to England, Ireland, South Africa. Red cards are a bit too extreme.

And some of the red cards are just ridiculous. Check this one out below.

Actually, I thought that was a fair call.

De Allenede was 5m away when he put his hands up for the charge down, then took three more strides before striking Sopoaga with a forearm to the throat. He had plenty of time to pull out of that, and he did not need to raise his forearm. He could have just fallen to the ground. He made no effort whatsoever to stop, and even if he just followed through with an ordinary tackle, it probably wouldn't even have been a penalty because the drop kick went over. What De Allende did there was intentional, reckless and dangerous - Red Card all day long.

 

[All Black]

Actually, I thought that was a fair call.

De Allenede was 5m away when he put his hands up for the charge down, then took three more strides before striking Sopoaga with a forearm to the throat. He had plenty of time to pull out of that, and he did not need to raise his forearm. He could have just fallen to the ground. He made no effort whatsoever to stop, and even if he just followed through with an ordinary tackle, it probably wouldn't even have been a penalty because the drop kick went over. What De Allende did there was intentional, reckless and dangerous - Red Card all day long.

A penalty for the raised elbow, yes...but a red card? I disagree. Despite what the laws say, too harsh IMO. If that was a crime, I'd say it was petty theft of $5 and for that, De Allende received the death penalty.

Red cards should only come out for the worst. What can WR do about red cards runing the game? Stop bringing it out for offences that were yesteryears 'slap on the wrist'.

 

[Reiser99]

A penalty for the raised elbow, yes...but a red card? I disagree. Despite what the laws say, too harsh IMO. If that was a crime, I'd say it was petty theft of $5 and for that, De Allende received the death penalty.

Red cards should only come out for the worst. What can WR do about red cards runing the game? Stop bringing it out for offences that were yesteryears 'slap on the wrist'.

So you're saying that a raised arm/elbow to the throat, with force and speed, especially late when he had time to pull out, is a minor offence and on deserves a slap on the wrist? Maybe get forearmed to the throat first and then say it's a minor offence. It's dangerous and made worse by the way he chose to continue his run at full speed.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

yeah, generally i end up on the more lenient side of these things, generally think things are getting our of hand with cards for this and that....but a deliberate forearm to the throat is pretty bad

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I'd say the De Allende was a red. The only time I've taken 3 steps like that even at full tilt and not been able to adjust at all, I've already been halfway to the floor. He jumped, eyed up the player and saw an opportunity to have a cheap shot. It was almost certainly intended to be a shove to the chest but if you try for a cheap shot there is a chance it will go very wrong.

 

[All Black]

So you're saying that a raised arm/elbow to the throat...

Nah Im saying what Ive said, Ive put in basic english and so there shouldnt be a need to twist what I said by adding 'elbow to the throat'.

Yeah like I said before, and Ill repeat again for you - a penalty only for me.

 

[All Black]

What can WR do about Red Cards ruining games for the fans?
Well so far this thread has come up with more cards, more penalties and support of previous red cards.

Not from me however as I do believe the once rare occasion of a red card is now creating a lot more 14 players vs 15 games compared to yesteryear. Some of these offences are tiddlywinks IMO and thats where our game is headed.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

i agree in general, accidents being carded etc....but the forearm is too far for me