The should it or should it not be a red card thread.

It’s a bit hard to take you seriously given Porter smashing Retallick’s jaw was judged by the disciplinary committee as only meriting a YC as it was a “soak” tackle. Only the most one eyed of fans would claim a NZ prop smashing James Ryan’s jaw and getting only a YC would have been equally well received by Irish and Leinster fans such as your good self

The Stewart RC was a complete and utter joke imo and I’m glad for him that it was downgraded.

the whole thing is a lottery at present. I’d be in favour of following super rugby where the player is sent off and the TMO has 10 minutes away from the heat of the moment and the baying of the rabid home fans to take a reasoned and objective look at the incident before deciding the final colour of the card.

rugby really is a hard sell at times to casual fans. RWC will generate new interest but arcane rules and protocols don’t lend themselves to attracting new fans to the game.

Glad red card was rescinded, I hate them for anything other than deliberate foul play. There has to be some sort of recognition that players choose to play rugby, one of the most physical team games there is, nobody is forcing them to play. We certainly knew the risks when we were playing and played anyway. The game will die with constant red cards and games being decided early on. Especially when it's the underdog team.

I was at Italy match 2022 and they got put down to 13 or was it 12? men at one stage and we left and went to the pub.

The Aussies and NZers have a different perspective on this though. They actively want to tone down the punishments for head contacts because they're competing for viewers with NRL and Aussie Rules, who don't really seem bothered about concussions and such.

Look at this;

A two-match ban, and there's plenty of commentary that the game is gone soft, wasn't intentional, etc etc.

Now, the 'casual fan' referred to above loves seeing that, it looks great on a highlight reel on Twitter, and that's who the SHers need to appeal to. That's why they're trying to lessen the punishments for high tackles, to get the TV dollarydoos rolling in.

Unfortunately, the 'casual fan' won't be paying out for the CTE lawsuits that are coming down the tracks in rugby and the 'casual fan' doesn't care if parents (like me) won't let their kids play rugby any more.

Far far better than anything I could write. This a thousand times.

You're right the Australian and NZ markets are competing with sports that have a much more casual relationship with player safety. They have to do whatever they can to bring money in and keep rugby competitive. That's why they are constantly looking at ways to balance player safety by punishing head contact without "ruining" the contest and losing viewers. Hence the tinkering around the red cards. I think they are right to look at finding something between a yellow and a red as they currently are in the NH.

The clip you posted, I don't think any rugby fan would object to a hit like that being a straight red followed by a long suspension. Like 12 weeks.

I've seen a few posts saying that in the SH theres an attitude that **** happens, theres head contact, they're adults and people just need to get on with the game. That is kinda true. But that's an attitude across society in NZ, Aus and SA. People tend to be less risk averse. Theres a thinking of "yeah go for it but if you hurt yourself, it's your own fault".

Not sure how well I'm explaining this.

Covered already.

There are many in the NH who are similarly 'less risk adverse' but it is risk to other people that they are happy to accept.

The advent of professionalism has transferred a critical level of the duty of care to the employer.

The quantum of how much of this duty will be measured out in the courts soon enough.

Sorry, my post was nothing to do with yours. I'd quoted someone else with a response but that same response had already been given on the thread so just edited my own post as it was needed.

The cases lodged by former players are under civil (rather than criminal) liabilty.

If these players can demonstrate loss and the courts take the view that WR and it's member Unions were aware of the potential for this loss and negligently failed to act then WR & Unions are liable.

But this is a big ask and may take years to establish and even then settlements without prejudice may serve to obscure a true state of affairs.

His point is - presumably- that something being reckless resulting in something highly dangerous does not make the action highly reckless to which mitigation doesn’t apply according to law quoted. The reference to tackle in his post is irrelevant. I can’t comment on whether this is true under laws though.

re red cards and wider issues around game. Do people think making this a red card vs yellow would change any behaviours? In my view the gain of making this very unlikely contact a red card is almost zero vs outweighed by impact on game. Despite comments above casual fans are very much out off by red cards. Steward had no idea if Keenan would kick or pick up ball and had almost zero time to react. I’d be very surprised if we ever saw a contact like this more than 1 a year across professional game.

The focus should on behaviours that can be changed. This needs to continue and despite the protests about state of game is working Just look at a game from 5 years ago. So many tackles there don’t happen now as they would be yellows or red.

also sanctions for actions deemed red do need to increase. This 2 week can stuff is nonsense