25 Aug 2015, 15:09#3
Oh dear lord ! Yes, let's just get rid of the rules of the game entirely, shall we ? So the spectators can be " entertained ", because we all have the mental capacity of a gnat !!
We have already seen two trips in the warm up matches go unpunished ( one by Zebo in the Ireland/Scotland game and one by Kockott in the England/France match ) The latter incident went unpunished because the Referee deemed it occurred " after the whistle " Now, that seems Ref's won't be troubled by mass Spear Tackling/Brawls/Neck Breaking/Kicking....the possibilities are endless.....as long as he has tootled his little whistle first. So there's a heads up for the teams !
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
25 Aug 2015, 15:30#4
The Labuschagne incident was a good example. Labuschagne mistimed his charge...he was clumsy. Did that one incident really deserve to determine the whole game....make the thing a non contest.
With the modified rule, from the individual's point of view he is gone for the game. The team is punished by 10 minutes with 14 men.....the spectators still have a contest to watch.
All the usual post match procedures should remain in place...the individual could be banned as indicated.
CLclevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CLclevermikeCoach57,555 posts
25 Aug 2015, 16:39#6
DA
I am sitting on the fence here. I think that two yellow card offences should not automatically be a red card offence - it should rather result in banning of the offender for a match or two afterwards.
However, i also am of the opinion that aggravated offences should be punished severely as it is not only the entertainment part that needs to be taken into account - but also the welfare of the player. You could find that that type of offence could end in a long term injury putting a player out of the game permanently or for a protracted period of time.
The idea of a replacement for a red card offence is to my mind extremely questionable as it could encourage teams to take out key opposition players out of the game and then replace the culprits with other players. The offending team gets light punishment the team on the receiving end gets severely inconvenienced by the removal of a key player out of the game.
There is very little chance of the rules been changed for the benefit of the spectators - the main concern will remain to remove thuggish behaviour by players and protect the interest of players on the receiving end. The only change I believe is to stop the system of the second yellow card leading to an automatic red card and dealing with the offender subsequently by hitting him hard in the pocket .
GEgeneraltit
Pro3,164 posts
25 Aug 2015, 16:50#7
I think Moz has a good point here.....one player can punish the remaining 14 and the country with all its following...by one uncontrolled act...the culprit should be removed however and replaced and substituted and punished severely...where it hurts most...his pocket...bigger fines and ommission of future games...very much more.
BEBeeno1
Captain40,032 posts
BEBeeno1Captain40,032 posts
25 Aug 2015, 18:28#8
The red and yellow cards are nz greatest weapons. I t has been noted we receive twice as many as they.( It is not unreasonable to assume we are penalised twice as heavily all round).
I am all for taking away this stick used to cheat SA sides out of wins.
DA is correct the kiwis will abuse matters no matter what!
The spectators need to be considered.
Moz is correct. We cant have these reds ruining games. AND we
must not tolerate bent ref in pocket nz refs!!!!!
25 Aug 2015, 19:20#9
...Bean Brain stop making things up....maybe rugby league has the answer with no yellow cards at all and that seems to work - players are put on report instead for the judiciary to sort out afterwards..
DBDbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DBDbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
25 Aug 2015, 19:41#10
The card system is flawed due to inconsistent application. Keep 15 players on the pitch at all time, but make the sanction for validated cards stricter on the layers and the team. There are too many errors by officials in this regard and the impact of these errors on the outcome of games has been too big to keep the application ot the laws as is.
BEBeeno1
Captain40,032 posts
BEBeeno1Captain40,032 posts
25 Aug 2015, 21:45#11
Draadie really talking about "errors" - hahahahahahaha very naieve!!
Ou brycy pinninh his hope on a bent judiciary which with monotonous consistency sees SA players getting harsher sentences by far!
No I am afraid the only real answer is to boot the bent kiwis and the bent ozzies out of the game for a season and warn them next time its two seasons etc. Give them time out to reflect on their bent approach to the game.
We could join the NH comp for the season and oh how very pleasant it will be to have fair contests!
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
25 Aug 2015, 22:14#12
DA you have a point. One thinks back to the tackle on Derick Hougaard against Samoa back in the 2003 WC....a clear attempt to hurt the player. Still I dont think any of the top teams would risk such a tactic. And the player has to accept a potential long banning, to help the team.
On balance I think I would be prepared to take the risk, but perhaps the team should be subject to more financial jeopardy in the post review. Punish the perpetrator, preserve the contest.
In ice hockey which has similar penalties to rugby....there is a 2 minute minor and a 4 minute double minor with the player off the ice. If a goal is scored the player returns. Then there is a 5 minute Major, which is not negated by a goal.
A similar system in rugby could see 10 and 20 minute penalties...roughly aligned with yellows and reds. Perhaps in the case of a yellow, the player comes back if a try is scored. In the case of a red he doesn't come back, but a sub could come on after 20 minutes. Both changes feel like an improvement to me.
26 Aug 2015, 01:48#13
Nope, if you want to have different rules, watch a different sport. Simple as that.
And we do not want to go the way of Rugby League, thanks. We have already made enough concessions in that area for the " fans " who have some form of ADHD, or something similar, that renders it impossible for them to actually concentrate on an actual game involving rules and doesn't just have two teams running harem scarem around the pitch for the entire match !!
As for your idea, Beeno.....I have told you many times.....the answer is NO. You do not get to come and play with us. We do not want you. Simple as that.
Now, can we all just get back to watching the game of Rugby Union ? Thanks awfully.
DBDbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DBDbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
26 Aug 2015, 09:03#15
Becks, red and yellow cards is a fairly recent addition to the laws of the game and given the controversy it creates often enough, it only makes sense that they review it. I love the game like it is as well (the essence of the game, not the off the pitch garbage), but there are too much leeway in the application of the laws. It is a professional sport now, so it's about time they do something about systems that are still handled like amateurs by amateurish "professionals".
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2015, 15:10#17
I cant think of any other sport where a team's prospects are significantly impacted by the appointment of the ref. That alone says rugby has a rules problem.
DBDbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DBDbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
26 Aug 2015, 19:57#18
Moz, the laws are fine, it's the inconsistent application thereof. There is not a proper judiciary... only a shell for pretense, ir shouldn't even be called a judiciary, rather a tribunal. I don mind the odd unfair penalty, but the wrongful sending off of players are a sin that can be prevented.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2015, 21:13#19
But don't you think the scrum, the breakdown, high tackling and the forward pass are all very complicated. And even the interpretation is complicated...which leads to refs effectively creating the laws through interpretation?
DBDbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DBDbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
26 Aug 2015, 22:36#20
Barring the scrums, it's not that complicated, and even the scrums is only complicated due to over policing IMO. Scrum penslties for genrral technical infringements should not be penalties.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
26 Aug 2015, 22:40#21
Have to disagree....the variation in interpretation is vast.....that can only come from complexity. I do agree on the scrum penalties, though. Why is a player penalized when he is overpowered? Again I can't think of another sport where being outperformed leads to a penalty.
DBDbDraad
Captain26,388 posts
DBDbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
27 Aug 2015, 14:09#22
Moz, the interpretation should be made easier for everyone. That will help, but no matter what you do, some aspects like judging forward and offside passes will always be problematic in a fast paced game. There is no way to fix it without quite advanced tech.
MOMozart
Captain49,914 posts
MOMozartCaptain49,914 posts
27 Aug 2015, 15:06#23
My problem is the guidelines to refs in dealing with complicated situations are a nonsense. Backwards out the hands for example. How does a ref judge that...what if it's forward out of the hands but the body is turned 10 degrees to the vertical?
In the old days the receiver had to get the ball behind where it was passed....that's a clear cut rule which is easily verified by the video ref. I'd go with that rule, which would validate 99 per cent of passes.
In the old days you couldn't push in the scrums till the ball was fed in....scrums worked.
In the old days the feed into the scrums had to be straight....scrums were a better contest, hooking was a real skill.
In case after case the rules have been dumbed down or relaxed to the detriment of the game. Space has almost been eliminated on the rugby field, because loose scrums now allow hands in...so rucking isn't necessary and forwards can float into backline defence.
Rugby was a much, much better game in 1965.
