But I think Red is for an action which is dangerous to another player - lifting, spearing, punching etc......... In single player incidents they need to make it simple.
Yeah agree. Not advocating that we hand out reds based on perceived malice just saying as a spectator it’s easier to accept that a guy is going to be off for the rest of the game if his actions seemed malicious. I do like the report system in League where the action gets reviewed but the player is not sidelined for the remainder of the match so the game is not ruined by one incident but that opens a whole other can of worms.
He's never been the most amazing defender.
Certainly wasn't driven hey. Just a sloppy tackle. Don't think too many people would be upset if he just got a yellow.
So what? The laws are based on how the player lands - i.e. which part contacts ground first. If the player goes head first any which way, the potential outcome is terrible. So, IF World Rugby is basing their sanctions on player safety, it makes no difference if some think "he wasn't driven, hey" or otherwise. Rather than having a guessing game with these tackles on the vibe of how much the player intended it, or drove the player down, they'd be better focussing on perhaps a better system of cards; perhaps utilising the often proposed idea of the Red being player off 10 mins, then subbed, so the team gets numbers back, but is penalised with fewer replacement options. Then make any attack on the head, whether by high tackle, striking, or tip tackle a Red on the basis they are trying to preserve player safety. Take out the ambiguity.
