![]() |
Front row red cards |
Post Reply ![]() |
Author | |||
John ![]() Veteran ![]() Joined: 15 August 2004 Status: Offline Points: 4654 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted: 27 February 2022 at 3:59pm |
||
So, 20 minutes into todays game Italy are reduced to 13 men. They lost their starting hooker to a serious arm injury and then the substitute got a red card for a shoulder to the head tackle. They then had to take their wing off to bring a prop on to make sure they had 3 front row players on the pitch and then take a back row player off because they couldn't contest the scrum. So Ireland are beginning to score tries whenever they feel like.
I understand this rule was introduced to prevent teams cheating when tgey were getting hammered in the scrums but it has esduced todays showpiece to an instantly forgettable one sided practice run. And if it was their starting hooker who had been redcarded or was in a fit state to return after injury, then the punishment would have a reduction to 14 not 13. This is a wrong law in that it gave the Italians an incentive to get an injured player back on the pitch (absolutely impossible in this case but one can imagine an injury where the player might have come back on). Its also punished the the crowd who shelled out for a seat to watch a non contest and makes the tournament a less easily marketable package to tv. |
|||
![]() |
|||
Sponsored Links | |||
![]() |
|||
dyniol53 ![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() Joined: 08 April 2018 Location: Llundain Status: Offline Points: 1849 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
I had one idea recently.
You can have 16 subs on the bench but can only use 8 (ideally fewer) That way every position is covered and you might even have 6 front rowers to choose from to avoid this. It’s very hard to determine what’s an injury subs and what’s a non-injury sub but would be great to only allow 3 tactical subs to encourage more players to be playing a full game.
|
|||
https://twitter.com/exile_podcast?lang=en
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Jones2004 ![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() Joined: 29 September 2019 Location: North Wales Status: Offline Points: 1399 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
I can understand why the 13 man rule was brought in - having uncontested scrums negates some of the disadvantage of being down to 14 (as the flankers can get off the scrum quicker) and so was deemed to be advantageous to the team who’s been carded - therefore making them go down to 13 removes that advantage. However I think we can all see that being down to 13 for 60 minutes is too harsh a punishment for a red card.
Any other punishment is too complicated to make sense (such as being down to 13 for only 10 minutes, and then returning to 14 for the rest of the game) therefore I’d simply suggest that they allow the team to stay with 14 players. Sure and the carded team have a bit of an advantage from having uncontested scrums, but so be it.
|
|||
![]() |
|||
ap sior ![]() Veteran ![]() Joined: 08 May 2005 Location: Wales Status: Offline Points: 10708 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
I would agree with your points, but there should be some form of punishment for the red card, perhaps stay at 14 men, but the team down to 14 should have to put 8 men into each scrum. (Not sure whether that is currently the case)
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Jones2004 ![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() Joined: 29 September 2019 Location: North Wales Status: Offline Points: 1399 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
I’d say if it’s a contested scrum the carded team can put 7 in the scrum if they want (although they’re under pressure then of course). However if it’s uncontested 100% agree with you that they should be forced to put 8 into the scrum.
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Eastern outpost ![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() Joined: 13 March 2012 Location: South Suffolk Status: Offline Points: 18309 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
Btw, when Faiva got his red card, did anyone notice where the Irish prop on clear out duty made contact with the Italian? It looked head height, too.
No replays, of course.
|
|||
In a world where you can be anything – Be Kind.
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Eastern outpost ![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() Joined: 13 March 2012 Location: South Suffolk Status: Offline Points: 18309 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
Have a look at this http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1qO5ZJVRe4
See where the elbow from Furlong lands.
|
|||
In a world where you can be anything – Be Kind.
|
|||
![]() |
|||
surfing-mtber ![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() Joined: 28 January 2012 Location: Devon/MilfordH Status: Offline Points: 2640 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1qO5ZJVRe4
Link amended
|
|||
Joshua24:15
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Eastern outpost ![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() Joined: 13 March 2012 Location: South Suffolk Status: Offline Points: 18309 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
|
|||
In a world where you can be anything – Be Kind.
|
|||
![]() |
|||
ap sior ![]() Veteran ![]() Joined: 08 May 2005 Location: Wales Status: Offline Points: 10708 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
Furlong should be cited and get a red card in my view. Clear line of sight, elbow to the head.
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Jones2004 ![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() Joined: 29 September 2019 Location: North Wales Status: Offline Points: 1399 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
I’d say it would probably be a penalty against Furlong, at the very most a yellow card. Not something that would’ve changed the course of the game, and certainly not enough to warrant a citing IMO.
|
|||
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
|
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |