On Reds Cards ................................

[fatprop]

I happen to come across an interview on ABC radio yesterday with Peter Fitzsimons and in between his usual crap he suggested a rather interesting position on Red Cards.

He suggested that straight Red Cards should only be given if there is an intent to injure.

It seemed very sensible to me

Thoughts?

 

[Cardiffblue]

I happen to come across an interview on ABC radio yesterday with Peter Fitzsimons and in between his usual crap he suggested a rather interesting position on Red Cards.

He suggested that straight Red Cards should only be given if there is an intent to injure.

It seemed very sensible to me

Thoughts?

think this is the point me and Dai were making. there's a huge difference between a fourth grade psychopath and captain of national side. Drop tackles need to be eliminated, but intent should be assessed. Trouble is this all kicked off at international level after O'Driscoll's shoulder dislocation. Mind there was no sanction at the time whatsoever. Between doing nothing and letting a truly shit side reach the showpiece final when at least two teams knocked out in semis there has to be an alternative

 

[Karl]

Intent is impossible to prove in real time. It requires detailed examination and even then - in terms of things like dangerous play, it's subjective. What's more, why should a careless dangerous tackle be treated less harshly than an intentional dangerous tackle? Both can put someone in hospital. Anything that's dangerous (just limiting the example to this for the purpose of this comment) should be treated as such and let the judiciary determine severity and intent with regard to suspensions etc. Unless you Red Card it, it's a slap on the wrist and not a sufficient deterrent. You need to remember the consequences of this sort of conduct and the fact that there are kids from Juniors up looking to the international game for heroes and examples, whether they know it or not. I think the IRB have it right on this one.

 

[Toddy]

It'd be very hard to prove intent.

I wondered if the ref should be able to go upstairs for the TMO to review whether it was worthy of a red card. Though under the current rulings the Welsh captain would still have been red carded IMO.

 

[fatprop]

I disagree, intent is pretty easy to notice to me and the punishment for what is no more than technical weakness can be done afterwards by suspension.

 

[Toddy]

But did the Welsh captain intend to injure the player? He definitely picked the player up off the ground rather than choosing to drive him back in the tackle. The ref doesn't have the benefit of the replay so has to go off what he sees in real time.

 

[Scotty]

I disagree, intent is pretty easy to notice to me and the punishment for what is no more than technical weakness can be done afterwards by suspension.

The video would need to be used, and should be used. It can confirm or deny the refs suspicions regarding the incident and should make the decision making more consistent.

I am sure we can wait a few minutes for such a crucial area. In this case we would have had a red card anyway, however we also would have had many other reds that haven't been given, that would have gone a long way already to stamping out this sort of tackle.

 

[Cutter]

Intent requires an analysis of the mind. I don't think we should change the rules, but I think, for a red to be given, the ref, his assistants and the video ref should vote (without communicating their voting intent and, for the on field guys, this would mean hitting a button on their flags). If there is a majority, the guy goes. If not he stays (but goes for 10mins) and the judiciary decides. I suspect 3 of the 4 would not have given him a red card.

 

[EVERYFWDTHINKTHEYREA6OR7]

Disagree,

To prevent players getting seriously injured at all levels of the game it needs to be stamped out. Punishment of 3 weeks also fits the crime.

This stops 'accidently' injuring someone through negligence.

 

[Ruggo]

The ref made his call on the day and I back that. Warburton getting an additional three weeks is over the top. Watching his boys get bundled out of the cup from the sideline and not being able to do anything about it while knowing he let his team and country down is plenty of punishment and the judiciary should of taken this approach at the hearing.

 

[Ruggo]

But did the Welsh captain intend to injure the player? He definitely picked the player up off the ground rather than choosing to drive him back in the tackle. The ref doesn't have the benefit of the replay so has to go off what he sees in real time.

As any player he set out to hurt his opponent but not injure him. Good players play hard and sometimes things go wrong but only the filthiest of slime intend to deliberatly injure another player.

 

[fatprop]

Disagree,

To prevent players getting seriously injured at all levels of the game it needs to be stamped out. Punishment of 3 weeks also fits the crime.

This stops 'accidentally' injuring someone through negligence.

When has it stopped negligence? It only punishes negligence.

I would have preferred 10 minutes and 6 weeks off

 

[EVERYFWDTHINKTHEYREA6OR7]

When has it stopped negligence? It only punishes negligence.

I would have preferred 10 minutes and 6 weeks off

Exactly, don't lift in the tackle.

Now say the tackle went an inch the other way and he was in a wheelchair for the rest of his life? That red card is something Warburton will have to live with for the rest of his life.

I am fine with it, he should not have done it.

 

[Cardiffblue]

S'fine. Not really talking about Breadman's send off. It happened and since rugby's 'laws' are not really laws but interpretable edicts, it will be argued about for years. Just think that there is an opportunity to use the technology for something positive -mind you most tackles look worse in slo mo! and a means of coming to terms with the fact that the RWC final will be a piece of shit because of a single decision that has allowed a total rabble to reach the final to reach the showpiece final. I will watch it, but then again I am not the target audience since I will watch it anyway. No one in work has the slightest intention of watching any more. Whatever the rights and wrongs of Rolland's decision, the financial repercussions are catastrophic

 

[louie]

so fatprop your thinking for late shots and shot of the ball? that kind of thing.

Agree with what your saying. But also think that spear tackles and dangerous stuff should be given longer bans with yellows in the game.

 

[whatty]

Cardiff not a dig but deep down do you think Roland had no option irrespective of the huge ramifications many have discussed to award a Red card for that offence?

 

[cyclopath]

Disagree,

To prevent players getting seriously injured at all levels of the game it needs to be stamped out. Punishment of 3 weeks also fits the crime.

This stops 'accidently' injuring someone through negligence.

It need not affect whther they get cited and suspended.

 

[fatprop]

so fatprop your thinking for late shots and shot of the ball? that kind of thing.

Agree with what your saying. But also think that spear tackles and dangerous stuff should be given longer bans with yellows in the game.

I going to say it depends, Warburton's deserves him to have plenty of time on the sidelines to work on his technique, but he didn't mean to do that tackle. It just happen, the moon and stars aligned and he ended up screwing up

this to me is a send off "type" tackle, and he only got 10 minutes

[video=youtube;zk6nh5xwWi8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk6nh5xwWi8&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/video]

or this one

[video=youtube;eN0pbn64K9Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN0pbn64K9Q[/video]

or this one
[video=youtube;2DMqLnDpzXM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DMqLnDpzXM[/video]

but these two Yellows and time off

[video=youtube;KI9IcCnm9ds]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI9IcCnm9ds[/video]

but the Warburton was more the latter than the former
[video=youtube;LMHfH5lXZqY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMHfH5lXZqY[/video]

 

[Slim 293]

I was glad to see Lloyd Johansson's career go downhill after seeing that dirty tackle on Mortlock...

 

[Toddy]

I'm not sure how you can say Warburton didn't mean to do that tackle as he was the one that made the choice to lift the guy. He had other options but didn't take them. A brain explosion is really the only way to explain it.