The UAFC

Even the official Pro 14 email doesn’t go further than Round 3 and they don’t include any travel either to or from Europe and S.Africa.
Personally I am very doubtful if this will go ahead.
Two borough in S. London are going thrpugh a massive testing exercise because of the South African Variant so can’t see any UK or Devolved Government welcoming the Boks without quarantine and the RoI are even neurotic over quarantining after a slow start.

Trial laws in the Rainbow Cup - red card replacements after 20 minutes and captain appeals against ref decisions among other things.

Cap'n Grumpy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 6:42 pm Trial laws in the Rainbow Cup - red card replacements after 20 minutes and captain appeals against ref decisions among other things.

Hmmm, sitting on the fence on the new laws. My gut says a sending off should be a sending off but our two disasters when Jared and Tom Court were sent off in the opening minutes were far too influential in the outcome of the matches. Maybe 20 mins and a replacement might work.

An appeal by the captain works for me. The only problem is making for more stoppages.

The drop outs - meh.

20 mins is too short. Maybe they could use an orange card or something. Some offences are just plain red cards.

I wonder if the drop outs will change how teams attack and defend from 5-10m out. It will be interesting to see if the defending team try to hold a player up hoping they will be driven over the line or even pull them over the line themselves while getting under the ball.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I can see why they are trialling the 20 mins red card thing. Trying to keep a deterrent for the player, which can't return, but not completely ruining the game.

Problem I have is what happens when it is something like a!stamp or a gouge or even leading with the shoulder into the face ? Bringing a replacement on after 20 mins for this doesn't seem right to me. Maybe we'll end up with an orange card rather than a red one.

Captain's challenge sounds good but will just add more stoppages. We already have the ref, assistants, tmo, big screen replays to pick things up. 20 seconds is not a long time if the captain is at the other side of the pitch. Will be interested to see how many successful challenges there actually are which were not picked up already.

Don't get the dropout thing. Why penalise the attacking team? Organised defences are difficult enough to break down.

The drop-out could stop the teams with fancy big packs from pushing over so much. Then you keep their fatties on the go with a quick drop-out.

They are trialing these adaptations in the Super rugby Aotearoa competition currently. There were several successful challenges in the recent Hurricanes Crusaders game. The key thing for me was having the TMO/ref conversation played over the speakers in the stadium which means that the stoppages weren't so bad. It's something I've been advocating for a while, because of the tv viewers can hear the ref, why shouldn't the crowd who've made the effort to go.

Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk

The red card should be accompanied with a match ban of two or three games.

mid ulster maestro wrote: ↑Fri Apr 16, 2021 7:49 am The red card should be accompanied with a match ban of two or three games.

It usually is a least that at present anyway!

Dave wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:44 pm The drop-out could stop the teams with fancy big packs from pushing over so much. Then you keep their fatties on the go with a quick drop-out.

It'll be interesting to hear the rationale behind this one.

Snipe Watson wrote:

Dave wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:44 pm The drop-out could stop the teams with fancy big packs from pushing over so much. Then you keep their fatties on the go with a quick drop-out.

It'll be interesting to hear the rationale behind this one.

Keep the game flowing?

Dave wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 9:51 pm 20 mins is too short. Maybe they could use an orange card or something. Some offences are just plain red cards.

Was discussing this with Grumpy Junior, and we were in agreement (roughly) which isn't too often the case, that for offences such as a second yellow, when perhaps one of those was for a "team punishment", or a repeated "technical" offence, a red card seems harsh. Likewise with some other offences where the intention was clearly not to injure an opponent or tackle improperly, but sometimes despite best intentions, a player commits foul play. To receive a red card for something like that, particularly early in the game makes any punishment disproportionate. The introduction of a 20 minute sin bin (which is effectively what this is) followed by substitution of the offender in many cases will mean a more proportionate punishment to player and team.

However, there are times when a red card with current punishment is more proportionate. Punching, gouging, biting etc etc should have no defence and should be soundly punished. For such offences, the proposed law change might make the punishment for the team more palatable, but there should be no hiding place for the player.

It strikes me that the in between system - in practice like an orange card - might be the answer, albeit I have no doubt there will still be occasions when players, officials and fans will also end up debating what colour is appropriate, with everyone having an opinion . . . and only Rumn's being the right one - for reasons he will explain ad nauseum, for ever and ever, amen!

kUD wrote: ↑Fri Apr 16, 2021 1:44 am They are trialing these adaptations in the Super rugby Aotearoa competition currently.

Is that the similar to some Welsh cup, except in the Welsh one the name is mostly consonants?

Cap'n Grumpy wrote:

Dave wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 9:51 pm 20 mins is too short. Maybe they could use an orange card or something. Some offences are just plain red cards.

Was discussing this with Grumpy Junior, and we were in agreement (roughly) which isn't too often the case, that for offences such as a second yellow, when perhaps one of those was for a "team punishment", or a repeated "technical" offence, a red card seems harsh. Likewise with some other offences where the intention was clearly not to injure an opponent or tackle improperly, but sometimes despite best intentions, a player commits foul play. To receive a red card for something like that, particularly early in the game makes any punishment disproportionate. The introduction of a 20 minute sin bin (which is effectively what this is) followed by substitution of the offender in many cases will mean a more proportionate punishment to player and team.

However, there are times when a red card with current punishment is more proportionate. Punching, gouging, biting etc etc should have no defence and should be soundly punished. For such offences, the proposed law change might make the punishment for the team more palatable, but there should be no hiding place for the player.

It strikes me that the in between system - in practice like an orange card - might be the answer, albeit I have no doubt there will still be occasions when players, officials and fans will also end up debating what colour is appropriate, with everyone having an opinion . . . and only Rumn's being the right one - for reasons he will explain ad nauseum, for ever and ever, amen!

I agree with a good portion of this. Although the red card is not just a punishment it is also a deterrent. The team punishment of losing a player is likely a greater deterrent in terms of hopefully creating behaviour change, particularly in tackle technique. Having said that, the purpose of the trial will be to see the impact on player behaviour. At present there are a lot of red cards for probably more mistimed actions than more serious foulplay as you described. It will be interesting to see the outcome.