When did rugby stop being a contest? Or why do we have laws in place to effectively end a contest between two teams where the spectators and fans feel the effect of a yellow or red card more than the players?
I heard an interesting remark yesterday and it got me thinking… When a player transgresses on the field of play and receives a card, who are we (read officials) effectively punishing, the team losing the player, or the spectators watching the game?
First off don’t get me wrong, ill-disciplined or foul play should be dealt with and the transgressors punished – but as things stand currently the way we go about this seems to punish the viewing audience more than it actually does the team…
Rugby is essentially a game where 15 guys on the field of play competes with 15 other guys or opposing players to see who is the best.
Officials, laws and interpretations of laws are there to ensure the contest is fair and that the team who eventually leaves the field as the winners, has done so being better than their opponents.
Laws are constantly tweaked in the game of union to ensure the contest between two sides are fair, and this in essence is what we as supporters or the viewing audience would like to see.
Rugby is also a professional sport, reliant on these factors to ensure they deliver a product to its viewing audience that is of the highest quality, but more essentially, a contest that is fair.
Under the current laws if a player transgresses through repeated, cynical or foul play offenses they run the risk of being carded. Yellow they are sent off for 10 minutes, red they miss the entire match.
The question then remains, if we alter the contest to such an extent that the one team has such a significant advantage over another team, is it still a contest and essentially, what is the point then?
When you alter the playing numbers on any side the contest disappears almost completely. It is unlikely a team reduced to 14 or less men will dominate or be able to compete against a team of 15 men. Strategies, game plans and tactics are completely altered in the team whose playing numbers were reduced not to mention the highly likely scenario that they will concede points in that period thanks to a disadvantage in player numbers.
Also, the point is really to punish the offending player is it not?
How much punishment is really given to such a player if he only takes a 10 minute break? If he is not cited in addition to being punished on the field that player is available for selection the very next week.
So who is really getting punished? The player, or the viewing audience?
Firstly, I do not want to see the game or rugby union end up as a lob-sided affair where there is no fair contest and secondly, if we are to punish offending players let’s do a proper job of it and really punish them by hitting them where it hurts most – their pockets…
Would it not make more sense if we are to keep a record of incidents in the game of rugby which is only reviewed post-match with sanctions being handed out there? These sanctions can include suspensions and even fines imposed on players and teams depending on the severity of the incident. We can still punish serious offenses on the field of play if the transgressions were clear to all on-field officials, but what I would like to see eliminated is the guess-work that goes into the current procedure practiced where on-field officials are not afforded television replays to assist them in making decisions which alters the outcome of a match drastically, or as mentioned, effectively ends it as a contest.
Post match reviews are also done with much less emotion, and more time to evaluate a possible transgression by individuals who are not influenced by in-game scenarios such as home crowds (dare I say big screen repeats) as referees are being subjected to currently. It might also just elminate the complexity of the sentence handed down where we can get greater consistency.
The dynamics of on-field sanctions can also be altered to be more severe without ending the contest. For instance for foul play, no matter where on the field, the team or player concedes a penalty on their 22-meter line. For deliberate and repeated or cynical foul play by the offending team in the red-zone the on-field officials can decide to award a non-goalable try (5 points only) or the option to the opposing team of a penalty in the center of the 22-meter line or where the offence took place in the red-zone.
But essentially, no team is put at the disadvantage of inferior player numbers and the viewing audience can still look forward to a fair contest.
Subsequent to the match decisions are reviewed post-match as it is currently done and if further sanctions can be imposed on the player, or even the team through fines and suspensions, it is done here. Teams will not only feel the effects of foul play much worse than is currently the case by losing the services of the player(s) in question, but both team and player will also suffer financially through a fine-based system imposed on either with the player also losing out of any future match fees.
The point of laws and sanctioning players is to clean up the game of rugby and I agree with this 100%, but let’s raise the stakes for teams and players without putting the viewing (and paying) audience at a disadvantage by ending the game as a contest.
It makes sense what you say. Perhaps carding a player should be dealt with in the following way.
If the player commits “foul” or “dirty” play he should be sent off immediately as the discipline in the team is important to the point where foul play is the intent of injuring or hampering an opponents ability to compete.
When a player transgresses repeatedly in a game, how about the citing commitee sit after the game and if a player has for example commited more than 4 infringements, he gets penalised by being banned for 1 match, in the same category as the one he played in other words test for test, currie cup for currie cup.
This way the team that is suffering because of the repeated infringements against them have already recieved the penalties during the match, and thus have benefited from that.
I agree that apart from dirty play, the contest is in most cases over as a result of cards.
Just an interesting statistic. The points difference between SA and NZ is an average of 3 points per match in favour of the All Blacks. In any match you get a card you automatically stand to lose at least 7 points.
Those of you who were in the Army will remember that a corporal or PTI Instructor used to say “Die maattjie wil nie saamwerk nie… sien julle daaaaaaaaai boom… is julle al terug?”
Carding works a lot like that… 14 players suffer whilst 1 sits lounging on the sideline for 10 minutes.
The principle works well, whether you believe in it or not, and it even sometimes results in a klap or a good scolding from one of your own team mates…
Ill-dicipline is just that… bad behaviour… and needs to be sanctioned properly. There’s a very easy way to keep the contest fair…. don’t succumb to ill-dicipline and do not continiously repeat offenses. That way you’ll keep 15 players on the field!
Agree with the fact that a Team must also sanction players who are repeat-offenders… yes, dock their pay or match bonusses and / or do not select them again for a while…
But on-field the whole team is responsible for keeping dicipline and playing according to the Laws!
A Tip-tackle is doff… so too an eye gouge or a punch or a head butt. Repeated offenses is also a very convenient way of cheating, so punis the farker properly….
Cards can stay, no problem… rather sort yourselves out… end of problem!
@ grootblousmile:
Getting pissed at a braai or party is sometimes just as doff … but it happens… 🙂
@ grootblousmile:
How would you explain refereeing inconsistencies, wrong calls, missed calls or even players milking these situations as JDV has warned very recently?
The question is not whether they should be punished or sanctioned, the question is whether there is not a better way to do it?
Anything that influences a fair contest in the game of rugby I am against in principle and I believe there are better ways of dealing with these things on the field of play, and post match which could have a much more desired effect.
3@ Blouste:
Yip…. and you’ll carry the consequenses… the Babbelaas is like a Card, man….. hehehehe
In addition, you will never be able to remove the human element of referees, therefore, you will never be able to fully control the consistency the game of union requires.
The most logical solution for me is to remove any areas or situations in the game where they have to guess, or as they would call it, use their interpretations of the situations which inevedably leads to inconsistency and what we all hate about the game.
Apart from deliberate foul or dirty play like a Bakkies head-butt and similar incidents, on-field sanctions such as cards should be limited or done away with completely.
@ grootblousmile:
“Die maattjie wil nie saamwerk nie… sien julle daaaaaaaaai boom… is julle al terug?”
….yes, and they made the offender sit under a tree while the rest of the troop had to run…obviously the corporal knew we will sort out the offender afterwards 🙂
GBS @ 2
hoe lekker lag ek nou …
ja, ken daai een (sien julle daai boom)
ons s’n het net verder gegaan
..
as jy trugkom, word jy in die soetste stem gevra “en waar is dit?”
dan wonder almal hardop “waar is wat?”
word dan gevolg deur “die blaar. waar is die blaar wat julle moes saambring?”
dan’s ons weer daar weg
kom jy trug met die blaar .. is dit “en wat is in jul hande?”
antw ons gewoonlik “ons het die blaar gaan haal wat ….. gesê het ons moet bring”
dan word ons beveel om dit te gaan trugsit!! lol, was fun gewees!!
..
daar was natuurlik variasies gewees afhangende van hoeveel k*k ons aangevang het … die 1 wat ons d meeste gehaat het, is wanneer 2 ouens ons afgek*k het
dan stuur 1 jou om ñ blaar te gaan haal
en die ander 1 sê jou aan om dit te gaan trugsit … dan kom nr1 trug en vra waars sy blaar ens ens ens 😆
bos_otter @ 7
nooit daai 1 ge-experience nie 😆
Mornê,
How many of the Cards we’ve seen have been Referee error or blatant Referee bias.. or should I say what percentage of Cards are a rsult of that?
One can argue till you’re blue but the tip-tackles of Mossie and Jean and Cooper were not “Milked”, neither is a punch or head butt, or retalliation milked….
Don’t get me wrong, there is merit in looking at alternate means of sanction or remedie…. but giving an unconverted try as punishment or a sure-fire 3-pointer penalty, is also or will also be construed to be unfair advantage and taking away from a fair contest, just like Cards.
Maybe a multi-pronged approach is a better way of dealing with the matter… a combination of things, like enabling the 3rd TMO referee to also watch for foul play and to adjudicate on the fairness (based on video repeat) whether the offence warrants a Card, taking that decision away from the referee and his assistants…
Maybe development of alterior sanctions on field like you mention… properly researched and properly implimented.
Maybe an IRB or Union or SARU or whatever sanction against players and / or their Union, after the fact…. in addition to a suspension.
I’m not shooting down remedies.. I’m merely stating that probably 90% of Cards can be eliminated in house, by simply playing a more diciplined team game.
Those players or Unions who do not adhere….. as jy dom is MOET jy kak!
8@ Ashley:
Yip, who would ever forget a “ordentlike opfokkie”…
… there was also Rifle-PT…… klim die leertjie met jou geweer…. or arms outstetched and rotating the rifle till your arms dropped off….
…. and “Paal-PT” (I understand they did away with it around 1988)…. or carrying a Samil tyre… or Ammo Boxes….
And if you were really naughty, like getting drunk and not pitching for parade, Pack Drill by the RSM…. farking hell!
@ grootblousmile:
Yes jy moet kak as jy dom is but do not rob other elements in rugby like supporters of what this game is all about and that is the basis from where I am arguing alternatives.
I think there is quite a number of incidents where cards were either dished out unfairly or not at all…
The problem with this is not the action, but how it is done. Currently referees have one shot to make a call, if it is not clear where in rugby it often isn’t, guesswork comes into play and when someone’s guess can influence a game then it becomes a lottery and this is not what the game should be about.
Bigger TMO influence could result in more stoppages so yes, a combination of suggestions might be the way forward, but essentially I want to see 15 players from each side remain on the park so we get a contest for 80 minutes. If player actions deliberately stops another team from scoring, give them gimmie points which they would have gotten in anycase if a player was sent from the field given the disadvantage the other team will suffer from lesser player numbers.
@ grootblousmile: Nie so seker nie GBS…ons het nog roete marse…”opfokkies” en gewone PT met damm dik teerpale,in ’91 gedoen. Ook met die stretchers warrop hulle die jakkalsies mee gechute het…ammunisiese cannisters en sulke damm square concete blokke wat jy op geen mannier gemaklik kon dra nie.. Darem noot n opfok met tyres gehad nie
13@ bos_otter:
Op ons Eenheid, wanneer ons kak aangejaag het, het ons vir “Tant Betta” gaan kuier…. dit was ‘n paar ou sementdamme in die bos…. dan moes ons die “Beskuit” heeldag ronddra…. dit was sulke sementblokke….
Eishhhhhhhh, hoe pyn my arms sommer klaar…. hehehehe
“Kom troep, kry vir jou ‘n beskuit!”…. tot jy skyt!
LUKOF
Lang uitgerekte kompanie opflok
Leeeekkeeer
13@ bos_otter:
Samil Tyre geryg oor ‘n Paal…. daar gaat julle….
Ergste opfok wat ons gekry het gedurende Offisiers opleiding, 24 van ons, het hulle ‘n dokter en ‘n ambulans saamgestuur…. 12 van ons het dit terug tot by die Eenheid gemaak, die ander moes met die ambulans terugkeer.
15@ biltongbek:
Hoe minder die aantal troepe, hoe makliker om hulle goed op te fokkkkkk.
Man, as mens ‘n opfokkie behoorlik doen kan jy die rowers klaaaaarrrrrrrmaak binne 15 minute….
@ grootblousmile:
lol….meeste van ons opfokke was daar n ambulans… 30% van ons inname is verplaas na ander eenhede na ons basics. Baie van hulle was G5K5 met stress fractures 🙂 Ons was die eerste 1 jaar inname by die valskerm korps….hulle het toe nog nie mooi geweet hoe om al ons opleiding in n baie korter tydperk in ons in te dril nie.
ons korporaal het n paar keer gese…vanaand pis julle bloed…daai aand, was daar n paar ouenes wat pienk pee gehad het. Die wetter het my kniee opgeflok. Het 4 week in die hospitaal gele nadat hulle die kraakbeen tussen my knie skywe vwerwyder het, maar is geluk nie verplaas nie
Man, ek dink nou terug aan my army dae met verlange.
Het nou die dag met n’ pel van my sit en gesels oor die army dae, dit is darem van die lekkerste stories wat n’ ou kan vertel om n’ vuur.
Hier is n’ vinnige een. Terwyl ons besig was met opleiding op DE Brug by die skiet baan was daar een roof wat maar bra kak was met n’ R4, die Staf sersant het hom n’ internationale skut genoem. Julle ken daai storie van 2 in die stop wal, vyf op jou eie teiken, op jou eie tyd gaan aan.
Nou hy het Amerika, Spanje, Afrika ens raak geskiet, vandaar die bynaam.
Een dag toe vererg die Staf home en klap die man teen die kop, hy het sulke dik brille gedra, en wragtig die die bril afval, toe skiet hy die eerste keer sy target raak.
18@ bos_otter:
Flok, net my Offisierskursus was langer as jou hele diensplig…
14 weke Basies, dan 12 maande Offisierskursus… ek het eers April van die volgende jaar my Pips gekry.
En as jy ‘n Kakhuisoffisier (KO = Kandidaad Offisier) was, was jy laer as slangkak, laer as ‘n troep! Daai wit bandjies het net een ding beteken, al die onderoffisiere wou jou nail, voor hulle jou eendag met respek moes salueer.
20@ biltongbek:
Skietbaan was altyd kak… daar was altyd een fokken dom roof wat sy geweer op “Race” gestel het in plaas van enkelskoot….. dan kak hy en sommer almal in sy peleton…..
Jy hoor net eweskielik “PRRT” en die volgende is ‘n sersant wat op die ou spring…
@ biltongbek:
ha ha ha :)Ons het so dozy ou in ons peleton gehad…heel deer die k@k….dinge het gewoontlik so verloop.
Luitenant skreeu: 5 rondes!!! enkel skoot!!!….op jou eie tyd!!!…..vuuuuur!!!! (rat tat ta ta tat!!!…ou maak sy hele magasyn leeg…die koeel trek so stof steep lyn teen die hewels agter die skietbaan uit )
Luitenant skreeu: Wie de moer het nou weer op automaties geskiet?…Peltz!!!!!!!!!
@ grootblousmile: lol ja…daar beaam jy sopas my storie 🙂
bos otter, was jy in bloem by die parabats.
Ons peleton moes een aand na UOVS gaan want een of ander afrikaanse kunstenaar het opgetree, na die vertonig to mis n’ paar van ons die samil, toe moes ons obviously terug loop.
n’ peleton of twee van die parabats, het ook terug geloop, want hulle was mos “rough”, “tough” en “selfish”. Hulle besluit toe hulle wil graag so paar manne dik tik.
Ons moes toe ons longe los hardloop om weg te kom. Toe ons by die bungalow kom toe besluit ons die parabats is die tipe wat “like” om grootbek te wees.
” man het ons daai drie ouens ged”’er, al 68 van ons.”
24@ bos_otter:
Ek was ‘n Lugafweer-kanondonkie….
Spesialiswapen was ‘n Russiese 23mm kanon, die ZSU 23-2…. 4 moes die kanon beman, 2-laaiers, 1 kanonbevelvoerder en een skut, wat die ding moes rig en die sneller trap.
Ding het 2 ton geweeg, en is gesleep agter ‘n Gary (short wheelbase Landie) of ‘n Samil 20….
Maar ons moes die ding ook self sleep en met die kanon gaan “Draf”… baaaaaie 2.4’s gedoen met die kanon. Die ding het net 2 wiele gehad, so jy moes nog die ding ballanseer ook soos jy hardloop.
Flok, Army Rugby was die hardste rugby wat ek ooit gejol het, Inter-Eenheid Rugby…. het goed gebliksem en is goed gebliksem daai tyd.
@ biltongbek: rofl….ja Biltong…ek was in Bloem. Is jy seker daar was 3 van hulle? 🙂
Grootblousmile, wanneer was jy in die weermag?
Ek het my basies gedoen in 1984, was 1985 op 61 meg bataljon in suidwes.
We had “Saamwerk Koppie” in Kimberley, and an old shooting range in PTA.I left a lot of blood sweat and tears there.
In basics we had a Sergeant with a beautiful Boland accent. On about day 2 he called the Platoon together and crapped us out for something (Didn’t even have haircuts yet), but he threatened us with the worst PT ever, till we kotched, and he came up with something I will never forget, because I had such a good laugh(in my head): “Ek laaik dit as ‘n troep kots”
And how many of you had a Sergeant Major that was rumored to have drilled his son in law to death. Ours was “Killer” Smit
Users Online
Total 224 users including 0 member, 224 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,330,861 Page Impressions
_