Anyone who has ever watched cricket umpires decide whether a catch has been taken close to the ground or not will be well aware of the issues a two-dimensional picture poses when dealing with a three-dimensional event.
You would be hard placed to find a cricket commentary team united in their view whenever this happens.
What they, the commentators, do tend to fall back on is ‘feel’, do you think the player in that situation would or could have got their fingers under the ball and, of course, do we trust them to then appeal accordingly.
It is this feel for the situation which we do not appear to be running with in rugby.
With the recently overturned Marika Koriobete red card, referee Ben O’Keefe is right there. He has seen hundreds of illegal tackles over his career and his first instinct is that the tackle is fine and he signals for a knock-on.
Then that nasty little voice in the ear pipes up and we are now reduced to a two dimensional frame by frame review of an event that has happened at real speed.
This is the bit that is really bugging me; the search then begins for the shot that confirms the TMO has been correct in intervening.
Using the Koriobete example again, we got probably three to four different shots of the tackle, but only one that looked like it had hit the head. No matter that the tackle’s first impact was lower, the red card shot is frozen after the tackle has slid up and contact with the head/neck is made.
If there is any doubt, then surely that must go to the tackler – but the search is already for a conviction.
Once a referee panel has got a shot of head contact, no matter how it came about, they are only going to reach a single conclusion and, because of the World Rugby focus, they only have one outcome available to them.
But not all high tackles are created equal. We can compare the Koriobete example to, say, Malakai Fekitoa’s high shot a few years ago in Dublin where he was never going to do anything other than take the bloke’s head off.
Such were the times, he copped a yellow and returned to the game later.
So, if we have two types of head contact, the incidental contact versus the reckless tackle which is only ever going to have a dangerous outcome, why do we only have one equal punishment for both?
Does this not appear to be the perfect argument for a red card with a 20-minute timer while still retaining the red card sanction in that your side is reduced to 14 for the duration, and the player cops a suspension.
Surely it is easier to decide between these two types of sanction outcomes than it is to decide if an incidental contact is worth the ultimate sanction.
This is where we need to trust the feel of the referees for which sanction path they go down, deciding on a deliberate reckless action of a player versus a rugby incident would be by the far easiest part of the process.
No system is going to be perfect and mistakes are still going to be made, but by having both the 20-minute and send off options open to them, then surely the volatility in decision making reduces.
Seems to me that in deciding whether there is a 20-minute red card in the game or not, World Rugby are asking the wrong question – let us have both available so the punishment can fit the crime.
Busted Fullback
Roar Rookie
Your right TH. That’s why I wrote: Tacklers and ball carriers have to be responsible for the safety of all players.
Rod
Guest
Wouldn’t be easier to yellow card the player for the standard 10 , in that time frame, it can be changed to a red if the TMO sees fit . Can the ref overall the TMO ie if they interject to wave them away much like a dissenting player
CUW
Roar Rookie
"one thing I Iearnt this week is that the arm of the impact shoulder must be used." maybe that part was not communicated tot he rubbish aussy ref in the Fiji game. he penalized a perfect tackle on DMAC saying shoulder charge. untill that - i always thought a shoulder charge is when the arm is tuck in against the torso. Maa Nonu used to be an expert at it
CUW
Roar Rookie
u can do that even with a yellow - coz im sure a decision can be made within 10 minutes. i mean there is a limitation 2 the footage u have - so whether u spend 10 minutes - 20 minutes or 60 minutes - u will be looking at the same footage but this may be a good practice to at least try out. coz i think the issue right now is to arrive at a decision within a short space of time , thus not slowing the game to a crawl. even in football its seen that tv review decisions made in haste are more wrong than right - saw it during the euros. but this may need a separate person or panel - coz u cannot expect the TMO to watch the live game as well as review a foul play decision same time.
Highlander
Roar Guru
Consistency of penalty impact is an interesting perspective, good thinking that.
Highlander
Roar Guru
Given the litigation around concussions, WR have to be seen to be taking steps to protect the players, that is an absolute
Derek Murray
Roar Rookie
I don’t agree chook. The new interpretations are right and critical for the games future. Ref’s just need to implement them properly
Derek Murray
Roar Rookie
Watching the deciding Lions test from 2001. Melon Finnegan lay on the ball and took some fearsome ruckings in that match. I still think Grewcock’s knee into the back of Stiles was as low a shot as I’ve seen on a rugby pitch. Also reminded how good a game Harrison had; way more than just the last minute lineout steal. I can watch this game over and over. The decider from 2013, not so much
itsgoodtobelucky
Roar Rookie
Make the YC 20mins out the game then and keep red as it is now, off with no replacement.
Bill Shut
Roar Rookie
I like the 20 minute rule idea. The red card gets the player out of the game. The red card also penalises the team. The penalty should be consistent. At the moment the length of the penalty is determined by when the infringement happens. So the same infringement can result is different penalty on the teams. So the 20 minute penalty is then consistent other than of course if it happens inside the last 20 minutes. Even if we start to penalise based on intent, there will still be room for incorrect application of the law, but it would be worth a trial at least.
The Yabbie
Roar Rookie
Good
Ken Robertson
Guest
Time is up on the card system Let’s red card it. The on field policemen’s job should be just that, a policeman and not judge, jury, and executioner. Let’s use our societal judicial system as the precedent for rugby infringements and do away with send offs in any form. Also look at motor racing where a black card for a serious infringement may be needed to disqualify a team. The current system just doesn’t work because of inconsistencies and the expectations we have of the officials on the day.
Piet
Guest
Take a good look at rugby clubs - anywhere in the world. Check on how many young kids are playing rugby and when you discover that not many are, ask parents why they're turning their kids away from the game. You'll find that most will say it's because of the violence and consequent injuries they see on TV. A game that has evolved into a spectacle of overfed overweight players with limited skill who spend 80 minutes crashing into each other as opposed to trying to advance by avoiding contact, as it used to be. The game has got to change soon and violent play has to be eliminated, or there eventually won't be a game to write about.
Lux Interior
Roar Rookie
That raises another aspect of this topic. Are the big screens able to provide as clear a slo-mo picture as the screen the TMO uses? If not, then the 2 officials aren't on a level playing field from the get go.
Muglair
Roar Rookie
I think you will lose them when you mention decision making
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Mug, No deductions for this movie, bit too radical and right-wing ie people making decisions without scientists or committees.
Muglair
Roar Rookie
Only works if film investment is tax deductible.
Tony Hodges
Roar Rookie
100%. I feel like the TMO as a decision maker is an idea left over from an era where not every ground had a screen (and might be necessary in the odd future game played in regional centres or something)
1eye
Roar Rookie
The red card in its current form is like the death penalty ...... sometimes they get it wrong.
PeterK
Roar Guru
hence why the ref should view the video and make the call.