Red Card Lottery at the weekend
-
I believe the shot was high and dangerous and he had plenty of time to aim lower. The issue is the impact a red usually has on the game and spectacle. Credit to Australia here but imagine WC Semi, full strength French side and it would likely be a different result.
I personally would prefer a red to be 10 minutes and not replaced. Reds used to be very rare and for when you bit off another players ear. Now we seem to have reds every weekend.
It is a team sport and one players brain fart or poor technique can fuck it for everyone. I just hope common sense prevails at some point.
-
@voodoo said in Red Card Lottery at the weekend:
@bones said in Red Card Lottery at the weekend:
@mariner4life said in Red Card Lottery at the weekend:
There it is. Layed out. Korobeti's is not even close to a red. Not even on the same ball park.
Rugby has lost its fucking mind
He was too high and as a result ended up shoulder to head. I would've probably sided with yellow, but look, if we want players to be more careful and they're not learning, red card makes sense.
Think they need to bring in the 20 minute red card and player is replaced though.
Totally agree.
I think 99% of people on here care greatly for player safety, and 80%+ want some movement away from reds meaning 14-man rugby after a non-malicious incident.
But I can't understand why people are choosing this incident as the hill to die on to make theit point. This isn't him in the defensive line, squaring up to make a hit and having a player adjust his height at the last minute to make incidental contact. This is a bloke running 25m at pace to try and make a huge hit, and he doesn't get nearly low enough. He chose his height, and it was blatantly wrong.
It's also a fucking shoulder charge which nobody seems to care about. His arm is pointing down, not wrapping around.
Shit tackle, right result.
If you pause at the right spot (shows 4 seconds but probably just a frame) you can see that he also drove up. Pretty hard to convince anyone that he wasn't taking a high risk approach that came off wrong when you come in that hard and drive up enough to lift the ball carrier off their feet.
-
I'm a not sure how I feel about the Koirebete hit. It seems identical to the red in in the Wales/Arg game. In both cases I would lean towards yellow using a drop in body height as mitigation/excuse. On the other hand, in both cases the tackler chose to make huge hit which they were unable to control, so I don't have much sympathy for either tackler. The 20min red would have been the right result in both cases, but unfortunately that was voted down.
A bigger problem is the inconsistency of what is being picked up by the referee and TMO. After the SA A v Lions game Gatland in a presser tried to argue that Faf should have seen red for his hit on Wyn Jones. Erasmus fired back on Twitter raising a couple of hits that were not reviewed (
. .
If we really want change behavior it is far more important that every high hit is punished rather than picking instances at random for severe punishment. I am reminded of story in Victorian England when pick pockets would be executed in public hangings. But people would continue to pick pocket at these events because the risk of being caught was so low.
-
@voodoo yeah I find this one quite similar to the Ofa red card. Far from malicious and not exactly aimed at the head - but just aimed too high and dangerous as a result. Like I said for the Ofa one - if MK had aimed at the midriff instead of the shoulder, the highlight would be on smashed em bro.
-
After all the fuss, and the NH voting down the 20 min RC, maybe we need a third card for the high tackles, with a 20 min sanction.
Red cards can stay as full game penalties but go back for being for filth, not minute mistakes made in split second decisions.
-
-
@kirwan said in Red Card Lottery at the weekend:
After all the fuss, and the NH voting down the 20 min RC, maybe we need a third card for the high tackles, with a 20 min sanction.
Red cards can stay as full game penalties but go back for being for filth, not minute mistakes made in split second decisions.
thats what ive been coming around too
My understanding was "intent" was deliberately excluded from the decision making process because they didnt want the refs to have to judge that...but they're having to interpret so much other stuff we might as well give them that latitude, give them the chance to stop a game from being ruined just because someone couldn't react in a fraction of a second
-
@nta said in Red Card Lottery at the weekend:
@jc said in Red Card Lottery at the weekend:
@kirwan An Orange card? 🤔
We talked about the amber card years back I seem to remember
"Wallaby-Gold" card?
-
I see Koroibete has been cleared and free to play in next game. Apparently first contact was with shoulder mitigating the red. I think this shows perhaps it's not fair to place the decision on the ref and TMO at the time and a report system like NRL makes more sense. Let the panel with multiple angles and time decide if it's red and deserves a suspension.
You could imagine how pissed off the Wallabies would have been if they lost.
-
When SBW got his red card against the Lions, Rugbypass did the analysis on it and said that he had 0.4 seconds to adjust to the original tackle line due to the dynamic situation of how the play unfolded.
I think that is slightly less than playing a shot against Malcolm Marshall!
Rugby is such a dynamic game at the gainline and tackle area that are we expecting too much from players at times, especially when they are travelling at speed and both are moving lower when tackling and anticipating contact?
The answer is probably yes. I would like to see a scenario where this kind of red does not impact the game drastically and is a 10 or 20 minute sin in and then player is replaced and down to 14 men for the whole game where it is deemed an incident of foul play
-
@dagrubster said in Red Card Lottery at the weekend:
Rugby is such a dynamic game at the gainline and tackle area that are we expecting too much from players at times, especially when they are travelling at speed and both are moving lower when tackling and anticipating contact?
No! It's really bloody simple and I don't understand why people have such a hard time grasping it. Yes there will be the odd mistake, but MK's wasn't, Ofa's wasn't. Why? They were aiming too high!
It's a really simple concept to grasp that players with or receiving the ball aren't going to remain prone so that you can poleaxe them, they're going to perform an action to evade, reduce or break contact. The onus is on the tackler to tackle safely that means not aiming at the shoulders because it's pretty bloody likely the ball carrier will drop.
Why are there so many players that pretty much never tackle high? Are we to believe that's luck...or is it technique?
-
@chimoaus I hate this ruling - what the panel is saying is that the ref was wrong to rc the player. It was one of those calls where reasonable people can disagree and the panel can even conclude that they would have called it differently, but this is not an example of a wrong call. Don't ban Koriobete sure, but saying he did nothing wrong is just objectively wrong.
-
@dagrubster said in Red Card Lottery at the weekend:
When SBW got his red card against the Lions, Rugbypass did the analysis on it and said that he had 0.4 seconds to adjust to the original tackle line due to the dynamic situation of how the play unfolded.
Bullshit. We can debate all the other calls mentioned on this thread, but the SBW hit is looking back the easiest call ever. The most generous interpretation that you can have of that tackle is that he was body checking Watson to stop momentum while Watson was being tackled and that technique was not uncommon at that time. But it was always illegal, the contact was always going be questionable at best. Saying he had 0.4 to maybe not concede a red card is not a defence, it is clear evidence that the hit was always reckless.
-
@sidbarret similarly over turning this RC essentially threw Gardner under the bus.
-
@taniwharugby said in Red Card Lottery at the weekend:
@sidbarret similarly over turning this RC essentially threw Gardner under the bus.
... and led to the 'Bridge' rule, where the offending player gets awarded a Penalty!
-
Geez the atrocious article from Mark Reason on stuff really ignites this topic. It is what he ignores that is of interest. Hollywood's and late hits on AB's are sacrosanct and World Rugby's ruling on Koroibete is misguided... But hey anything in the name of player safety, so any pointed rubbishing of Southern hemisphere refs and players is entirely warranted. Makes me wonder about the editors of Stuff more than anything else.
The poor refs and players need a better deal in this trial by media.
