Refereeing decisions

[KOB1987]

It does show you that Lynagh should have stayed down after the hit and ensured that play was stopped and he received treatment. It would have been almost inevitable that the issue would have been looked at and at least a yellow card issued.

There’s that, but if they can go back several phases looking for an innocuous knock on and then overturn a try because of it after the conversion has been taken, if they don’t pick something like this up until a few minutes later why can’t they take disciplinary action then? I get that something significant may have happened in the meantime but if it’s to the benefit of the offending team it gets reversed, if it’s to the benefit of the other team it stands. It’s just kind of like an advantage rule really.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Realistically, there are going to be times when the foul play emerges after whatever time limit is put in place.

I would be happy for yellow/red cards to be issued after a restart, with no accompanying penalty eg on the weekend, the Lions player is sent after the kick off when the incident is reviewed, and we just play from there with no penalty to Wallabies.

 

[Rob42]

This is where a strong, consistent judiciary process is crucial, to assure everyone that any foul play that is missed during the game will be well punished later. A long way to go on that front.

 

[Braveheart81]

Realistically, there are going to be times when the foul play emerges after whatever time limit is put in place.

I would be happy for yellow/red cards to be issued after a restart, with no accompanying penalty eg on the weekend, the Lions player is sent after the kick off when the incident is reviewed, and we just play from there with no penalty to Wallabies.

I think this would be a good outcome.

This is where a strong, consistent judiciary process is crucial, to assure everyone that any foul play that is missed during the game will be well punished later. A long way to go on that front.

I think the judicial process is far more consistent and straight forward than it was in the past.

We obviously know a lot more about the dangers of concussions etc. and are punishing foul play more harshly than we did in the past for similar incidents.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I think this would be a good outcome.



I think the judicial process is far more consistent and straight forward than it was in the past.

We obviously know a lot more about the dangers of concussions etc. and are punishing foul play more harshly than we did in the past for similar incidents.

Incidents that make it in to the judicial process are getting there. I reckon there is still a loooong way to go with incidents that don't get picked up by a citing commissioner (for many reasons)

 

[Braveheart81]

I reckon there is still a loooong way to go with incidents that don't get picked up by a citing commissioner (for many reasons)

There's definitely a bunch of incidents that do get missed.

I think part of the confusion is that potentially some do get looked at, are deemed not to clearly meet the red card threshold and then we don't hear anything about them.

I don't think off-field yellow cards add value because then you're looking for lower level incidents. I do think it would be helpful for a weekly wrap of incidents that were reviewed but deemed not to obviously meet the red card threshold.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I don't think off-field yellow cards add value because then you're looking for lower level incidents. I do think it would be helpful for a weekly wrap of incidents that were reviewed but deemed not to obviously meet the red card threshold.

I don't really agree on the last paragraph.

WR (World Rugby) have regulations where two yellow cards or two citing commissioner warnings in a match, or three in a tournament/series results in a trip to the judiciary.


We just never use them because Citing commissioners don't want to do their jobs

The foul play should be captured and dealt with. Probably meaning many more players suspended which is why they don't do it.

Edit - want to get rid of no-arm chop tackles....this is how you would do it

 

[Braveheart81]

I don't really agree on the last paragraph.

WR (World Rugby) (World Rugby) have regulations where two yellow cards or two citing commissioner warnings in a match, or three in a tournament/series results in a trip to the judiciary.


We just never use them because Citing commissioners don't want to do their jobs

The foul play should be captured and dealt with. Probably meaning many more players suspended which is why they don't do it.

Edit - want to get rid of no-arm chop tackles....this is how you would do it

I don't mind that but I think it's a huge step from where we currently are and on that basis is never likely to happen.

That's why I went for an in between option. Maybe a few more citings and some more clarity around incidents that are being talked about but didn't get cited.

The off field yellow cards/commissioner warnings are then reserved for incidents that were close to red cards.

 

[Wilson]

The ban for cumulative yellows or some sort of loading system is definitely something we're missing, the players repeatedly committing yellow card offences at the tackle are the most at risk of stepping over the line and doing serious damage to another player but we are currently ignoring that risk.

As I understand it those yellows are also generally ignored when the judiciary consider a players record for discounts on a ban, with only previous bans counting against them. That doesn't feel particularly well balanced to me.