Red Card - New laws?

[TheFrog]

I read that World Rugby is planning to implement a new regulation for red cards.

Following the number of controversies around red cards ruining the game, World Rugby would like now that the rule be adapted so that the red carded player is sent off definitely, but his team can replace him after 20 min.

So now, if you want to punch Farrell in the face, you put a second string player on the pitch, get him to take out the punchable face, and 20min later you're back to parity - actually possibly better?

[Tichtheid]

I seem to remember that a good while ago you couldn't actually get sent off in Aussie Rules, but if you did commit some atrocious acts you got banned for two games.
When I used to watch it on Channel 4 there was a player that played every third match.

[ASMO]

I read that World Rugby is planning to implement a new regulation for red cards.

Following the number of controversies around red cards ruining the game, World Rugby would like now that the rule be adapted so that the red carded player is sent off definitely, but his team can replace him after 20 min.

So now, if you want to punch Farrell in the face, you put a second string player on the pitch, get him to take out the punchable face, and 20min later you're back to parity - actually possibly better?

Dislike this idea, why not just make the existing rules a bit better, for example something that is clearly an accident downgraded to a yellow, something that is reckless stays a red, yes i know it will be subjective, but common sense should at least get most of those decisions right (Dickson excepted)

[Guy Smiley]

I seem to remember that a good while ago you couldn't actually get sent off in Aussie Rules, but if you did commit some atrocious acts you got banned for two games.
When I used to watch it on Channel 4 there was a player that played every third match.

There is no send off rule in Aussie Rules. There's a Tribunal and review process that issues penalties ranging from minor fines to multi week suspensions on a Monday or Tuesday night, after the games. There have been arguments for a send off rule for years, always just after a particularly dramatic looking incident that often attracts a smaller penalty than expected on review.

Their process is flawed as it allows the use of Queens' Counsel representation and arguments that get dragged into frustrating layers of technical bullshittery. It's also skewed in favour of whichever clubs the tribunal members used to play for.

For a code that is revered in some circles and exalted by its followers as the 'best game crapa lala alala', it's incredibly parochial and single state centric.

[Margin__Walker]

I'm all for it, albeit that will likely be a minority opinion.

Increase the punishment after if you want with longer bans if you are after deterrents.

Having teams a man down from the start of a game is pretty deflating to the spectacle (yes I know there's the odd exception). It's not even a consistent punishment with a world of difference between copping a red at 5 minutes in and getting one at 65 minutes in.

[Paddington Bear]

Give the head shot rules another year and it will be as rare as taking out a jumping player, which we were also told was impossible not to do

[C T]

I read that World Rugby is planning to implement a new regulation for red cards.

Following the number of controversies around red cards ruining the game, World Rugby would like now that the rule be adapted so that the red carded player is sent off definitely, but his team can replace him after 20 min.

So now, if you want to punch Farrell in the face, you put a second string player on the pitch, get him to take out the punchable face, and 20min later you're back to parity - actually possibly better?

Appreciate it's not quite the point of the thread but any punch to Farrell's face should surely be mitigated down to a yellow anyway?

[GogLais]

I read that World Rugby is planning to implement a new regulation for red cards.

Following the number of controversies around red cards ruining the game, World Rugby would like now that the rule be adapted so that the red carded player is sent off definitely, but his team can replace him after 20 min.

So now, if you want to punch Farrell in the face, you put a second string player on the pitch, get him to take out the punchable face, and 20min later you're back to parity - actually possibly better?

Dislike this idea, why not just make the existing rules a bit better, for example something that is clearly an accident downgraded to a yellow, something that is reckless stays a red, yes i know it will be subjective, but common sense should at least get most of those decisions right (Dickson excepted)

Agreed. I know there are many more questionable/debatable cards now but I’m firmly of the view that the player and the team should immediately suffer where there’s violent play. The definition of violent play tbc.

[Margin__Walker]

Give the head shot rules another year and it will be as rare as taking out a jumping player, which we were also told was impossible not to do

It's been a while already and nothing is really changing (albeit I may be talking rubbish there as I have no data). Taking out the jumping player is easier behaviour to correct. With head shots you are talking about the risk of it at every contact should something go wrong.

[Mr Bungle]

I seem to remember that a good while ago you couldn't actually get sent off in Aussie Rules, but if you did commit some atrocious acts you got banned for two games.
When I used to watch it on Channel 4 there was a player that played every third match.

Didn’t a player in a grand final, in his last game before retirement, line someone up almost before the game started? Totally unprovoked and with zero game repercussions.

[robmatic]

Having teams a man down from the start of a game is pretty deflating to the spectacle (yes I know there's the odd exception). It's not even a consistent punishment with a world of difference between copping a red at 5 minutes in and getting one at 65 minutes in.

I'm still in favour of trying to get rid of head shots but it does seem that refs are clearly happier to dish out red cards when it gets to the last 20 minutes of a match, probably because they know they won't get as much scrutiny for 'ruining the game'. So it probably is fair to say that it's not a consistent punishment.

[GogLais]

I'm all for it, albeit that will likely be a minority opinion.

Increase the punishment after if you want with longer bans if you are after deterrents.

Having teams a man down from the start of a game is pretty deflating to the spectacle (yes I know there's the odd exception). It's not even a consistent punishment with a world of difference between copping a red at 5 minutes in and getting one at 65 minutes in.

Make the team play the first 15 minutes of the next game a man down. Controversial?

[Paddington Bear]

Give the head shot rules another year and it will be as rare as taking out a jumping player, which we were also told was impossible not to do

It's been a while already and nothing is really changing (albeit I may be talking rubbish there as I have no data). Taking out the jumping player is easier behaviour to correct. With head shots you are talking about the risk of it at every contact should something go wrong.

I'd disagree with this - if you watch a game from even 5 years ago or so it is noticeable how much higher the average collision is. There has been a change but not a total one yet.

[Margin__Walker]

Give the head shot rules another year and it will be as rare as taking out a jumping player, which we were also told was impossible not to do

It's been a while already and nothing is really changing (albeit I may be talking rubbish there as I have no data). Taking out the jumping player is easier behaviour to correct. With head shots you are talking about the risk of it at every contact should something go wrong.

I'd disagree with this - if you watch a game from even 5 years ago or so it is noticeable how much higher the average collision is. There has been a change but not a total one yet.

Was more talking about a change in the last two or three years since the initial crack down. Tip tackles and taking out in the air reds seemed to drop off a cliff after the initial crack down. Head shots seem static as it's a harder problem to solve. You can mitigate in terms of the really reckless stuff and the repeat offenders on that front, but fundamentally it will keep happening by accident unless players are forced to go really low.

There was a trial in the Championship Cup in 2018 of tackles only below the armpit/nipple line that seemed to go nowhere.

Edit - Either way, I'd prefer it was the players, rather than the spectators taking the brunt of the punishment

[Line6 HXFX]

Rugby is fucked as a sport, in ten years we will be wondering what the we were doing supporting a game where like hundreds of people are getting diagnosed early onset dementia.
And for what? 80 minutes of entertainment a week?
I could fly a helicopter in VR , or play guitar or collect watches.. or dance around the front room in my underpants, with a VR headset on whilst playing guitar and browsing the Internet...a million ways to entertain on3s self.. in 2022..and no one gets dementia.
No one gets hurt.

I am feeling incredibly queasy about the game of rugby tbh. We can call them players..but they are real human beings, putting themselves at terrific risk at the end of the day, just for our entertainment...there is something wrong about the sport...and I don't even like half the f'ckers.

[Paddington Bear]

It's been a while already and nothing is really changing (albeit I may be talking rubbish there as I have no data). Taking out the jumping player is easier behaviour to correct. With head shots you are talking about the risk of it at every contact should something go wrong.

I'd disagree with this - if you watch a game from even 5 years ago or so it is noticeable how much higher the average collision is. There has been a change but not a total one yet.

Was more talking about a change in the last two or three years since the initial crack down. Tip tackles and taking out in the air reds seemed to drop off a cliff after the initial crack down. Head shots seem static as it's a harder problem to solve. You can mitigate in terms of the really reckless stuff and the repeat offenders on that front, but fundamentally it will keep happening by accident unless players are forced to go really low.

There was a trial in the Championship Cup in 2018 of tackles only below the armpit/nipple line that seemed to go nowhere.

Edit - Either way, I'd prefer it was the players, rather than the spectators taking the brunt of the punishment

Yes it's definitely taken longer. With that said the amount of games completely ruined by a red is not enormous, and I'd argue rugby's issue as a spectator sport comes more from the dominance of defence and the focus on physicality right now, both of which may be negated somewhat by depowering the tackle.

[Margin__Walker]

Yes it's definitely taken longer. With that said the amount of games completely ruined by a red is not enormous, and I'd argue rugby's issue as a spectator sport comes more from the dominance of defence and the focus on physicality right now, both of which may be negated somewhat by depowering the tackle.

I'd agree with that. Whilst spectators clearly want the game to be safe, there's nothing quite like watching a really dominant momentum shifting tackle.

[GogLais]

Rugby is fucked as a sport, in ten years we will be wondering what the we were doing supporting a game where like hundreds of people are getting diagnosed early onset dementia.
And for what? 80 minutes of entertainment a week?
I could fly a helicopter in VR , or play guitar or collect watches.. or dance around the front room in my underpants, with a VR headset on whilst playing guitar and browsing the Internet...a million ways to entertain on3s self.. in 2022..and no one gets dementia.
No one gets hurt.

I am feeling incredibly queasy about the game of rugby tbh. We can call them players..but they are real human beings, putting themselves at terrific risk at the end of the day, just for our entertainment...there is something wrong about the sport...and I don't even like half the f'ckers.

My line, which I use until even I’m bored with it is that if you were inventing a sport to be played by professionals who can spend all their time bulking up, you wouldn’t end up with Rugby Union.

[TB63]

Rugby is fucked as a sport, in ten years we will be wondering what the we were doing supporting a game where like hundreds of people are getting diagnosed early onset dementia.
And for what? 80 minutes of entertainment a week?
I could fly a helicopter in VR , or play guitar or collect watches.. or dance around the front room in my underpants, with a VR headset on whilst playing guitar and browsing the Internet...a million ways to entertain on3s self.. in 2022..and no one gets dementia.
No one gets hurt.

I am feeling incredibly queasy about the game of rugby tbh. We can call them players..but they are real human beings, putting themselves at terrific risk at the end of the day, just for our entertainment...there is something wrong about the sport...and I don't even like half the f'ckers.

Most rugby players don't play to entertain you. They play because they love the game. Go down to your local club and watch the 4th team play, as much passion as the pros..

[Kawazaki]

I read that World Rugby is planning to implement a new regulation for red cards.

Following the number of controversies around red cards ruining the game, World Rugby would like now that the rule be adapted so that the red carded player is sent off definitely, but his team can replace him after 20 min.

So now, if you want to punch Farrell in the face, you put a second string player on the pitch, get him to take out the punchable face, and 20min later you're back to parity - actually possibly better?

Dislike this idea, why not just make the existing rules a bit better, for example something that is clearly an accident downgraded to a yellow, something that is reckless stays a red, yes i know it will be subjective, but common sense should at least get most of those decisions right (Dickson excepted)

Rugby can learn from the United States Supreme Court decision in Jacobellis v. Ohio, 1964 regards pornography when it comes to adjudicating on foul play. 'I know it when I see it' is something we can all usually agree on.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it

[Kawazaki]

Rugby is fucked as a sport, in ten years we will be wondering what the we were doing supporting a game where like hundreds of people are getting diagnosed early onset dementia.
And for what? 80 minutes of entertainment a week?
I could fly a helicopter in VR , or play guitar or collect watches.. or dance around the front room in my underpants, with a VR headset on whilst playing guitar and browsing the Internet...a million ways to entertain on3s self.. in 2022..and no one gets dementia.
No one gets hurt.

I am feeling incredibly queasy about the game of rugby tbh. We can call them players..but they are real human beings, putting themselves at terrific risk at the end of the day, just for our entertainment...there is something wrong about the sport...and I don't even like half the f'ckers.

Most rugby players don't play to entertain you. They play because they love the game. Go down to your local club and watch the 4th team play, as much passion as the pros..

That's pushing it a bit with 4th XV players. Most still play to get away from the wife.

[Random1]

Rugby is fucked as a sport, in ten years we will be wondering what the we were doing supporting a game where like hundreds of people are getting diagnosed early onset dementia.
And for what? 80 minutes of entertainment a week?
I could fly a helicopter in VR , or play guitar or collect watches.. or dance around the front room in my underpants, with a VR headset on whilst playing guitar and browsing the Internet...a million ways to entertain on3s self.. in 2022..and no one gets dementia.
No one gets hurt.

I am feeling incredibly queasy about the game of rugby tbh. We can call them players..but they are real human beings, putting themselves at terrific risk at the end of the day, just for our entertainment...there is something wrong about the sport...and I don't even like half the f'ckers.

You serious? Or on the wind up?

[OomStruisbaai]

20 min red card rule works well.

[Uncle fester]

I seem to remember that a good while ago you couldn't actually get sent off in Aussie Rules, but if you did commit some atrocious acts you got banned for two games.
When I used to watch it on Channel 4 there was a player that played every third match.

Must be where this guy came from?

[ia801310]

Rugby is fucked as a sport, in ten years we will be wondering what the we were doing supporting a game where like hundreds of people are getting diagnosed early onset dementia.
And for what? 80 minutes of entertainment a week?
I could fly a helicopter in VR , or play guitar or collect watches.. or dance around the front room in my underpants, with a VR headset on whilst playing guitar and browsing the Internet...a million ways to entertain on3s self.. in 2022..and no one gets dementia.
No one gets hurt.

I am feeling incredibly queasy about the game of rugby tbh. We can call them players..but they are real human beings, putting themselves at terrific risk at the end of the day, just for our entertainment...there is something wrong about the sport...and I don't even like half the f'ckers.

Most rugby players don't play to entertain you. They play because they love the game. Go down to your local club and watch the 4th team play, as much passion as the pros..

This 100%, Rugby is going nowhere

[Ymx]

20 min red card rule works well.

Yeah, and it removes the fear and pressure for refs with issuing red cards.

It will probably lead to an increase in red cards

[Niegs]

Rugby is fucked as a sport, in ten years we will be wondering what the we were doing supporting a game where like hundreds of people are getting diagnosed early onset dementia.
And for what? 80 minutes of entertainment a week?
I could fly a helicopter in VR , or play guitar or collect watches.. or dance around the front room in my underpants, with a VR headset on whilst playing guitar and browsing the Internet...a million ways to entertain on3s self.. in 2022..and no one gets dementia.
No one gets hurt.

I am feeling incredibly queasy about the game of rugby tbh. We can call them players..but they are real human beings, putting themselves at terrific risk at the end of the day, just for our entertainment...there is something wrong about the sport...and I don't even like half the f'ckers.

Someone on twitter rightly, I think, called out WR for saying this is purely about entertainment and not at all about player welfare, despite them constantly saying it's their main priority.

There's no other reasoning for things like this other than a bunch of pundits and fans whinging "Red cards ruin games for me!" ... without holding players and coaches accountable for 'ruining' games with their lack of focus/care to correct behaviour that's been more regulated than ever (and rightly so).

[Margin__Walker]

Players are being held accountable. They are being hit with bans. Increase the length of those bans if need be. I don't see the behavioural incentive being any different.

[Dan54]

I read that World Rugby is planning to implement a new regulation for red cards.

Following the number of controversies around red cards ruining the game, World Rugby would like now that the rule be adapted so that the red carded player is sent off definitely, but his team can replace him after 20 min.

So now, if you want to punch Farrell in the face, you put a second string player on the pitch, get him to take out the punchable face, and 20min later you're back to parity - actually possibly better?

Appreciate it's not quite the point of the thread but any punch to Farrell's face should surely be mitigated down to a yellow anyway?

And I assuming you mean the yellow goes to Farrell?

[Dan54]

Rugby is fucked as a sport, in ten years we will be wondering what the we were doing supporting a game where like hundreds of people are getting diagnosed early onset dementia.
And for what? 80 minutes of entertainment a week?
I could fly a helicopter in VR , or play guitar or collect watches.. or dance around the front room in my underpants, with a VR headset on whilst playing guitar and browsing the Internet...a million ways to entertain on3s self.. in 2022..and no one gets dementia.
No one gets hurt.

I am feeling incredibly queasy about the game of rugby tbh. We can call them players..but they are real human beings, putting themselves at terrific risk at the end of the day, just for our entertainment...there is something wrong about the sport...and I don't even like half the f'ckers.

Someone on twitter rightly, I think, called out WR for saying this is purely about entertainment and not at all about player welfare, despite them constantly saying it's their main priority.

There's no other reasoning for things like this other than a bunch of pundits and fans whinging "Red cards ruin games for me!" ... without holding players and coaches accountable for 'ruining' games with their lack of focus/care to correct behaviour that's been more regulated than ever (and rightly so).

It seems that it easy to miss the real fix isn't it Niegs?

[OomStruisbaai]

20 min red card rule works well.

Yeah, and it removes the fear and pressure for refs with issuing red cards.

It will probably lead to an increase in red cards

The red cards for tackling (high or players in the air) is very harsh. I know it's for safety but at times the tackler duck or is smaller then the defender or the tackler timing is a second out. It's so easy to get that wrong. Playing with 14 is way to harsh even for 20 mins.

[Tichtheid]

I’m in favour of full red cards and teams playing 74 minutes with 14 if that what it means.
The game has evolved into this obsession with dominant tackles, it wasn’t there twenty years ago, it can grow out of the high hits, but not if we go overboard about a few teams losing because one of their players smashed a shoulder into another player’s face.

What I would like to see is increased consistency in the decisions regarding the level of danger in collisions.

However it has to be a matter of urgency that we get coaches to stop the high hits. It’s doable, the game has changed regarding taking out a jumping player as has been said, there are also fewer incidents of 120kg players launching themselves like missiles at players in a ruck.

[laurent]

When will they stop messing with the rules? Red should stay as it is.

It smacks of changing the rules to stay relevant.

[OomStruisbaai]

I’m in favour of full red cards and teams playing 74 minutes with 14 if that what it means.
The game has evolved into this obsession with dominant tackles, it wasn’t there twenty years ago, it can grow out of the high hits, but not if we go overboard about a few teams losing because one of their players smashed a shoulder into another player’s face.

What I would like to see is increased consistency in the decisions regarding the level of danger in collisions.

However it has to be a matter of urgency that we get coaches to stop the high hits. It’s doable, the game has changed regarding taking out a jumping player as has been said, there are also fewer incidents of 120kg players launching themselves like missiles at players in a ruck.

OK I see, you want fatties in the backline. Great.

[ASMO]

When will they stop messing with the rules? Red should stay as it is.

It smacks of changing the rules to stay relevant.

This 100%

The high/dominant hit is a cultural thing now, personally i would start putting sanctions in for clubs based on the number of yellow/red cards they accumulate, fines or even points deductions. Make the clubs accountable for changing the picture, give them the contractual freedom to sack players who are repeat offenders.

[laurent]

When will they stop messing with the rules? Red should stay as it is.

It smacks of changing the rules to stay relevant.

This 100%

The high/dominant hit is a cultural thing now, personally i would start putting sanctions in for clubs based on the number of yellow/red cards they accumulate, fines or even points deductions. Make the clubs accountable for changing the picture, give them the contractual freedom to sack players who are repeat offenders.

At low level in France double tackles and tackles above the waist are now forbidden. It's refereed a bit randomly but seems to work as regard to concussions.

[Ymx]

Double tackles forbidden??

I can’t fathom how penalising a double tackle would
A) be done consistently
B) not ruin a teams defence (for fear) where an attacker tries to slip through a gap

[laurent]

Double tackles forbidden??

I can’t fathom how penalising a double tackle would
A) be done consistently
B) not ruin a teams defence (for fear) where an attacker tries to slip through a gap

This was knee jerk after the death of a player in Fédérale at the tail end of a series of serious incidents. To be fair double tackles when you are forced to tackle low more or less results in one high tackle.
These rules apply to Honneur, Promotion d'Honneur, Première série down to 4th serie level, there is 6 level of rugby above that (top14, prod2, nationale, Fédérale1, 2 and 3).
At the lower levels the team defences are not that evolved.

[Paddington Bear]

When will they stop messing with the rules? Red should stay as it is.

It smacks of changing the rules to stay relevant.

This 100%

The high/dominant hit is a cultural thing now, personally i would start putting sanctions in for clubs based on the number of yellow/red cards they accumulate, fines or even points deductions. Make the clubs accountable for changing the picture, give them the contractual freedom to sack players who are repeat offenders.

Absolutely. It's notable that a lot of the voices you hear demanding an orange card, doing the 'you've never played, you can't understand' are people who made their career of being meatheads (Hamilton etc). I suspect if WR hold their nerve an upcoming RWC will focus minds. Four years of work and someone pulls a Charlie Ewels early on must haunt coaches and captains.

[Blackmac]

There is quite a bit of evidence to suggest that even tackles well below head height can contribute to concussion and long term problems. As others have already alluded to, rugby was not designed for full time, 120kg gym monkeys knocking the shite out of each other. I'm afraid i'm also one of those that find myself increasingly uncomfortable with the future consequences of the players in todays version of the game.