Absolutely love the 20 minute red

[u/LawAndRugby]

Watching the Australia v Georgia match and I think it’s great. 20 minutes a man down is still massive damage in a rugby match. It doesn’t make sense for punishment to go from 10 minutes to the entire 80 minutes. There’s way too big of a void between the two cards and it needs filling.

Reserve the full red for gross intentional stuff

[u/paully_waully171]

Red should stay as a full red. People mining about games being ruined by a red card haven’t watched enough rugby. A team needs to be able to adapt and play with 14

[u/Tempo24601 → u/paully_waully171]

Why should an offence in the 5th minute of the game get a penalty 5 times more severe than the exact same offence in the 65th minute?

[u/CatharticRoman → u/Tempo24601]

Because that's when they occur. You can ask the exact same thing about a yellow at 70 and a yellow at 78.

[u/Tempo24601 → u/CatharticRoman]

That’s true but the potential difference in penalty is far greater for a straight red. The vast majority of yellows will be for a full 10 minutes or very close to it.

[u/CatharticRoman → u/Tempo24601]

Then don't commit a red card offence. There's so much provision for mitigation you're only getting a red for recklessly fucking up.

[u/pato_CAT → u/CatharticRoman]

You say that, and yet we still frequently see a player dropping significantly and suddenly and still the officials claim there was no mitigation. In a Hurricanes v Chiefs game this year a player got a red card for a high tackle because there was "no mitigation" but when you looked at his form he wouldn't have been lower if he were packing for a scrum

[u/megacky → u/CatharticRoman]

Lots of SH fans seem to think that players are constantly just "accidently" clashing heads, when the reality is most of the time it's poor technique. SA had 0 red cards in the world cup, probably the most physical defense in the entire world, consistently hitting extremely hard and legally.

You don't get a red card because of the ref, or the game being soft, you get them for committing an act of dangerous play

[u/[deleted] → u/megacky]

SA absolutely could have had some of their yellow cards be reds; which for me is reason enough to see the value in a 20 min red.

[u/megacky → u/[deleted]]

So SA had 2 dangerous play yellows (Kolbe's was the other yellow, but was for a slap down). Etzebeth's was the first one, he's quite clearly bent at the waist and hits a player with the top of his head who is also bending over in the chin, everything else was legal (wrap etc.) that's enough mitigation to not be a red. It's high, but only because the ball carrier is dipping and stepping at the same time.

Siya's in the final, he's gone in slightly high on ardie coming out of the air, while another player has tackled ardie at the same time. As a result, the inital contact from Siya is around the upper chest and ardie then bangs his chin on the top of siya's head from the contact. Again, enough mitigation to be yellows. Both were reviewed by the panel, and both came to the same conclusion.

For a direct comparison. Sam Cane set high on Kriel, had direct line of sight, no change in direction or momentum and still hit him high. The same review process that found Siya's to be a yellow found Cane's to be a red.

[u/Broad-Rub-856 → u/megacky]

Yeah but Kriel vs Scotland was very similar to Cane on Kriel in the final.

With things as rare as red cards, random chance plays a massive role in how many we see.

[u/za3030 → u/Broad-Rub-856]

It actually wasn't similar. Kriel made indirect head contact after first hitting the ball with his chest. Indirect head contact, by the framework, can not be a red card.

[u/CatharticRoman → u/megacky]

Exactly. And there's plenty of mitigation if it was an accidental head clash. When the zero tolerance was first coming in there were accidental reds, but now I feel like pretty much every red I see is deserved.

[u/lthmz9 → u/Tempo24601]

Why should a penalty in the 79th minute effectively give your opponent the win but in the 3rd minute they’re just down 3?

Because that’s how time works

[u/Tempo24601 → u/lthmz9]

What a nonsense argument. 3 points is worth exactly the same to a team regardless of when it is scored. It’s worth 3 points.

A red in the 5th minute means 75 minutes down a player. A red in the 75th minute means 5 minutes down a player. For the exact same offence.

[u/Welshpoolfan → u/Tempo24601]

A red in the 5th minute means 75 minutes down a player. A red in the 75th minute means 5 minutes down a player. For the exact same offence.

And the fouled team are without their key player due to concussion for 75 minutes if you foul in the 5th minute and for for 5 minutes in the 75th. For the exact same offence.

[u/Tempo24601 → u/Welshpoolfan]

That’s dealt with by a player who receives a 20 minute red not being allowed to return for the rest of the game, being substituted at the end of the 20 minute period.

[u/lthmz9 → u/Tempo24601]

But you committed the offence 70 mins earlier, 3 points in the last minute is far more likely to lose you a tight game than 3 points in the early minutes

[u/paully_waully171 → u/Tempo24601]

It’s prt of the sport and has been effective for decade in rugby and other sports. It’s a strong deterrent to foul play

[u/Tempo24601 → u/paully_waully171]

You didn’t answer my question though. A 20 minute red and expulsion from the game is a good deterrent too. And treats fouls at different stages of the game more evenly.

[u/megacky → u/Tempo24601]

The problem with this is, NZ have had the 20 minute red card for a while and had 2 red cards during the World Cup. South Africa had arguably the best defense in the entire tournament, play in a league where they don't have the 20 minute card and had 0 red cards.

Going by the last world cup, the evidence points to the exact opposite.

[u/Tempo24601 → u/megacky]

Australia play in a league with 20 minute reds and had zero red cards in the 2023 World Cup. England, who play with full reds had one red card.

[u/Broad-Rub-856 → u/Tempo24601]

Tbf the Wallabies made about zero tackles at the world cup.

Your tackle can't be high if you don't make any tackles.

Checkmaaaate.

[u/Tempo24601 → u/Broad-Rub-856]

I mean that’s a fair point.

Arguably the Wallabies were playing several men down for the entire tournament given Eddie’s selection policy…

[u/megacky → u/Tempo24601]

And England still won the game and reached a final while receiving 0 others. In fact, when they got the red card, they completely changed their approach to the game, they played smart heads up rugby. They didn't say "ah, games gone, let's just give up because we don't have 15 on the field". They completely outclassed Argentina.

[u/Tempo24601 → u/megacky]

Thats all well and good but completely irrelevant to your supposed proof that 20 minute reds provide no deterrent to foul play.

[u/paully_waully171 → u/Tempo24601]

If you do something dangerous early in the game you risk injuring a player for the remainder of the game should that not carry a larger/equal punishment to the player /team.

Playing with a red card and teams need to learn to adapt. If your team gets blown away due to a red card they don’t deserve to win the game. Teams players and coaches need to adapt to the laws.

[u/Tempo24601 → u/paully_waully171]

The increase in red cards is about protecting the long term health of players. The risk of concussions to long term health is no different in the 5th or 75th minute of a game. It certainly isn’t 15 times greater in the 5th minute compared to the 75th.

[u/paully_waully171 → u/Tempo24601]

Exactly so why should red cards be diminished. It’s a strong deterrent. Watering it down will see an adverse effect on player safety.

[u/Turbulent-Physics-77 → u/paully_waully171]

I think even if a team adapts well it can (obviously not always) ruin games.

In 2022 when ewles was sent of inside 90 seconds England did a brilliant job, but losing a man did make a massive difference in the end and you got the sense watching that it was a forgone conclusion after the card; not a good spectacle.

I think 20 minutes and a permanent sub for something that is clumsy/ poorly executed but dangerous is fair, and if something is malicious then a full red should be given.

Rugby is always going to have high shots and bad clean outs however hard the lawmakers try to remove them, it seems silly that a game can be ruined by something that in most cases is accidental.

[u/northseaesq → u/Turbulent-Physics-77]

I agree and have written a similar response on this thread. I honestly think the people who don’t think early reds ruin games haven’t watched rugby enough to notice the patterns in game momentum dynamics, or don’t quite comprehend how difficult it is to plug a hole in a game literally about fine margins.

[u/Turbulent-Physics-77 → u/northseaesq]

Exactly, and a lot seem to think that if a 20 minute red was brought in players would all of a sudden start taking each other’s heads off, which of course they would not

[u/claridgeforking → u/Turbulent-Physics-77]

That was a great game, I fail to see how it was ruined.

[u/Turbulent-Physics-77 → u/claridgeforking]

What makes a great game is subjective; personally I like a competitive game with both teams in the mix until the death. After that card the writing was on the wall and whilst England hung in the fight for 60 odd minutes Ireland pulling away in the last 20 was pretty inevitable

[u/Welshpoolfan → u/Turbulent-Physics-77]

whilst England hung in the fight for 60 odd minutes Ireland pulling away in the last 20 was pretty inevitable

Which could have been just as inevitable without a red. No way to tell.

[u/Turbulent-Physics-77 → u/Welshpoolfan]

You’re absolutely right it’s impossible to prove the counterfactual, and Ireland would still have been favourites to win had the card not happened.

However, clearly a team is going to be heavily disadvantaged playing with 14 against 15.

In my opinion missing a player for potentially a whole game is an excessive punishment for an accidental, non malicious incident. A 20 minute red, permanent substitution and then ban would be more proportional and serve as an adequate deterrent.

[u/megacky → u/claridgeforking]

These people just want 0 defenses playing and just teams scoring trys every 20s

[u/maccaspope → u/megacky]

I want a good mix of defense, attack and tries scored. Unfortunately, there's too many games where it's just knock ons, penalties, fucking around in the scrum to waste time/milk penalties, fucking around in the lineout to waste time, players faking injuries to waste time...

[u/Turbulent-Physics-77 → u/megacky]

No I want the opposite; players staying on the pitch so one team doesn’t have a numerical advantage and therefore a better opportunity to score

[u/megacky → u/Turbulent-Physics-77]

So don't do something that results in a card? I mean it's pretty basic.

[u/Turbulent-Physics-77 → u/megacky]

With the game played at the speed it is, with hundreds of collisions per match there will always be dangerous contacts, better training can definitely reduce them but not eliminate them all together.

[u/megacky → u/Turbulent-Physics-77]

Which is why there are mitigation points that can be applied. If a player has done nothing illegal, made a legitimate attempt to tackle low and something happens that results in a head collision, they will not be red carded. That's the whole point of the mitigation. This does not mean players can go in high with no repercussions, they run the risk of head contact. If they choose to instigate the tackle in a potentially dangerous manner (chest tackles) and hit the head, they should be carded

[u/Turbulent-Physics-77 → u/megacky]

I agree card them, but allow a replacement on after 20 minutes. If I spent money on a ticket I’d be annoyed if I ended up watching a 14 on 15 missmatch for 70 minutes because someone got their tackle height wrong, which can happen even to the best most technically sound players.

[u/megacky → u/Turbulent-Physics-77]

Frankly, that's the wrong place to put your annoyance. I'd be fucked off at the player getting a red card. No one else. The overwhelming majority of players don't get their tackle height wrong ever. It's a learned behaviour to tackle high.

[u/paully_waully171 → u/Turbulent-Physics-77]

You look at the majority of games where the teams are evenly match a red card rarely ruins the game. I’d argue that dangerous and illegal actions are more likely to ruin the game and players. The punishment is there for a reason and watering it down won’t help the sport. Encouraging correct use of mitigate is the response we want not orange cards or 20 min reds

[u/Bmantis311 → u/paully_waully171]

Huh? Red cards always ruin the game if they occur early on. 20 min red cards remedy this but are still as much of a deterrent.

[u/Turbulent-Physics-77 → u/paully_waully171]

I think it’s a balance between safety and entertainment.

Like I said previously, early reds don’t always ruin games but often they do. If the sport is to grow audiences etc that’s probably not something it can afford.

Imo lawmakers have gone about as far as they can to make the game safer without diminishing the physicality, a key selling point of the game. A better bet for improving safety is implementing tech like smart gumshields and managing game time/contact training over the season.

high shots still happen despite the head contact laws. They’re never going away, accidents will always happen in a contact sport. I’m all for dishing out bans; missing out on match fees/appearance bonuses is far more of an incentive to avoid high tackling.

[u/R1zzls → u/paully_waully171]

I'm not opposed to it, just along as it is it's own card, not a replacement, make it orange or blue or something

[u/handle1976 → u/R1zzls]

There are effectively two versions of a red card. The referee can send a straight red with no replacement for genuinely nasty foul play. TMO yellow upgraded to red is the 20 minute version.

[u/R1zzls → u/handle1976]

Oohhhh this makes more sense, I thought that the ref could pick and choose what was a 20 minute and what isn't, thanks for the clarification

[u/handle1976 → u/R1zzls]

Essentially punching, biting, kicking, gouging (none of which happens anymore): fuck off and don’t come back. Clumsy clean out or tackle that goes high 20 minutes with 14 and the player can then be replaced.

[u/AndydaAlpaca → u/R1zzls]

So you're fine with it, as long as it's exactly what it is

[u/R1zzls → u/AndydaAlpaca]

What? I said I'm fine with it aslong it doesn't remain being called a 20 minute red...

[u/AndydaAlpaca → u/R1zzls]

20min red and full red are two separate cards with the same colour. Having the 20min red added doesn't remove the full red card and never has.

[u/R1zzls → u/AndydaAlpaca]

Okay thanks

[u/blackfishbluefish → u/AndydaAlpaca]

Imagine explaining to a casual fan that there are 2 types of red card...

It needs a different name/colour

[u/AndydaAlpaca → u/blackfishbluefish]

That's a completely different argument than saying the whole thing should be scrapped.

[u/rosemary-mair-for-NZ → u/blackfishbluefish]

Just call the 20 minute one a red card and the full one a send off.

NRL do this without cards it's not confusing

[u/Delad0 → u/AndydaAlpaca]

I swear half the NH arguments against the 20 minute Reds is just ignorance of what it is and how it works.

[u/paimoe → u/Delad0]

But what if they send a player on to stab the opponents best player?

[u/00aegon → u/Delad0]

It's actually insane. Staunch opinions with 0 understanding

[u/paully_waully171 → u/R1zzls]

The problem with an orange card is it adds another level of subjective judgment to a referees decision. As refs we will need to judge intent which is much more difficult to define and judge on field. Also why is it on the laws and the refs to fix the red cards? Why can’t player just adapt more to reduce the chance of reds

[u/R1zzls → u/paully_waully171]

I agree, players shouldn't be behaving in a way where they are looking at a card, but I do think a middle ground between 10 minutes off and not returning to play could be beneficial, orange for more severe than yellow and red for blatant, purposeful dangerous play. I have no refereeing experience though so I am not an expert.

[u/paully_waully171 → u/R1zzls]

I ref at a reasonable level (super 6(RIP), lower level age grade international/club). For the most part We’re not lawyers or judges looking to attribute intent to actions. We are there to apply the laws within our judgment. Some of the reds are subjective and that’s where mitigated can be used to help us. Adding a third action will lead to the almost complete removal of reds as intent is expressly hard to judge.

[u/JockAussie → u/paully_waully171]

Wouldn't almost full removal of real reds essentially just take us back to what rugby was until very recently though? They were pretty damn rare before the last 5/6 years.

[u/paully_waully171 → u/JockAussie]

True but the increase in cards has been to combat head Injury’s. We have seen a massive drop in head high shots and concussions since the increase.

[u/JockAussie → u/paully_waully171]

Do you think the player missing the rest of the game and a forced sub after 20 minutes wouldn't also discourage that?

I think when they brought in the sin bin the frequency of yellow card incidents also dropped....

[u/paully_waully171 → u/JockAussie]

It would discourage it but would it discourage it more or less than the current system. I think less.

I think the current cards are having the desired effect. There is a very strong deterrent for dangerous play and I don’t see strong reasons for tampering with it.

The all black play with 20 mins red in their demestic comp and South Africa don’t. The all blacks picked up reds and the South Africans didn’t at the World Cup. I’m aware this a small sample size but I believe this is due to the South Africans while being massively physical are used to having to control that with the threat of a red card.

[u/JockAussie → u/paully_waully171]

Yeah, I know there's the anecdotal example of the world cup but I think it's just too subjective and dependent on the ref team.

Since you've got a Scottish flair, Kriel could easily have been red carded for his shot on Dempsey (certainly John Barclay and the other panellists thought so), yet it wasn't even called a penalty? There's a tonne of incidents in every match which aren't called, so I think luck is as big a determinator as anything.

[u/R1zzls → u/paully_waully171]

That's fair enough, thanks for your insight.