How the times have changed

First topic message reminder :

Well after taking things into account from over the weekend I just want to talk about the Stuart Hogg incident, I am sorry if it has already been debated to death, but what I want to point out is that about fifteen to twenty years ago that type of challenge would have been par for the course so to speak, now before I get a tattering off people on here, I do not condone it and for me the right call was made by the officials, but I remember rugby always having sinister moments, Christ, I even remember watching a Pontypridd V Cardiff game at Sardis where an eighty year old man wanted to run on the field and hit Mark Ring for something he done that the ref did not see and the crowd were seething all game, I just wanted to point out how things have changed from the days when you could give somebody a good roughing up to put him off his game, without the video ref Hogg would not have got a red card on Saturday, and Biggar could well have had his mind else where for the rest of the game, now we are seeing more and more things that go on with all the different camera angles and the what not, although things like try or no try are seeming to be working and the fact that they could use the TMO to send Hogg off does anybody think it has taken something out of the game ? For me it has a little, but since professionalism and the players being more athletic I suppose this can only be seen as a good thing because it deters foul play, but perhaps I am just an old romantic of the game.

And dangerous because he dropped someone on his head.

Hogg could have damaged Biggars neck with that challenge as well

IronMike wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Biltong wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26595036

56 seconds in

Thanks mate, unfortunately I cannot watch it from SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVRysNQ-STo

Thanks mate, it does look quite innocuous when at first you look at it.

I suppose the belated jump and the shoulder to the face is what made it a red card. I would however think a yellow card would have sufficed.

Cannot agree.  There was intent and intent to hurt. Had to go.

Yeah well, we'll have to disagree on that. Sending someone off so early in a match ruins a contest. Rather punish the team for 10 minutes and let the contest carry on there after and cite the player and give him a lengthy ban.

The public pays good money to see a contest, they expect a quality match.

It looked a lot worse than Warburtons red card in the world cup, which was more of a contest? A semi final or a dead rubber? The only difference here is that Warburtons tackle was, "by letter of the law" illegal.

There are no dead rubbers in tests mate.

Scratch wrote:

Biltong wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26595036

56 seconds in

Thanks mate, unfortunately I cannot watch it from SA.

pm to you

Got it thanks.

Sorry, perhaps I missed your point. Were you saying Hogg's 'tackle' technically wasn't illegal. Or that Warburton was only binned on a technicality?

What Hogg did was dangerous. Deliberate shoulder to the jaw? I don't think so, but he deliberately put his shoulder into him so he has to take the punishment even if he didn't mean the outcome. Red is correct.

What Warburton did is dangerous. He lifted someone up and dropped them on their neck. Deliberately done? I doubt it very much. But he did pick him up and he drop him so he has to take the punishment for the outcome.

Similar events although I think Hogg was a deliberate cheap shot (but worse than intended) whereas Warburton was just clumsy.

I don't care when it occurs, a red is a red. If he ruined the game then he ruined the game. I've seen plenty of games against the boks and All Blacks ruined as competitions because they're too good, doesn't mean we should deliberately hamper them

My point was that Biltong brings the occasion into consideration whether to send someone off or not, if that were the case then I don't think Warburtons tackle would have had him red carded. But I'm going to leave it there because we can't really compare these sort of things can we?

At the end of the day we can all agree that what Hogg did was dangerous and warranted a red card, if the game was ruined for the travelling fans they can blame him, not the ref.

Nope, I made no distinction in regards to occasion.

@IronMike, gotcha   

Are we saying that anything goes in the first 20 mins as to show a red early in the game could spoil the 'spectacle'???? Seriously?

That's a slippery slope towards chainsaws and motorbikes. And roller skates.

Like The Running Man? That would be some spectacle though.

Risca Rev wrote:Like The Running Man? That would be some spectacle though.

Yeah, I wasn't suggesting I wouldn't pay good money to see it. I'm just not sure it's rugby.

Biltong wrote:

BlueNote wrote:"I don't know whether anyone would risk that though. What you are suggesting is mercenary, and I would think rather obvious"

I'd say I've seen that from pretty much every country in the time I've been watching rugby - a calculated gamble to take a key opposition player out and hope you get away with it.

I think you have a cynical viewpoint there mate. Softening a guy or intimidating a guy early in a match is true, that is a general aim I would think, however taking a player out of the game, I haven't seen much of that, if any.

I'm fairly sure Serge Betsen admitted that in the RWC it was his job to take Jonny Wilkinson out of the game, which he tried to do with late hits.

The red card is good. It's the ultimate deterrent. There's so few red cards issued that it's not a major problem. There's also far fewer cheap shots because of the threat of a red card and that's the point.

Red is red. I was at the game and it didn't spoil the atmosphere in fact it became more carnival.

The initial reaction of the crowd was an intake of breath, you could feel it wasn't just a late tackle. When they showed it on the screen it just confirmed that it should've been red.

I suppose it killed it for the neutrals. I enjoyed my team rubbing the Scots faces in it. I would also hope that the reverse is true if a Welsh player was so careless.

HammerofThunor wrote:Sorry, perhaps I missed your point. Were you saying Hogg's 'tackle' technically wasn't illegal. Or that Warburton was only binned on a technicality?

What Hogg did was dangerous. Deliberate shoulder to the jaw? I don't think so, but he deliberately put his shoulder into him so he has to take the punishment even if he didn't mean the outcome. Red is correct.

What Warburton did is dangerous. He lifted someone up and dropped them on their neck. Deliberately done? I doubt it very much. But he did pick him up and he drop him so he has to take the punishment for the outcome.

Similar events although I think Hogg was a deliberate cheap shot (but worse than intended) whereas Warburton was just clumsy.

I don't care when it occurs, a red is a red. If he ruined the game then he ruined the game. I've seen plenty of games against the boks and All Blacks ruined as competitions because they're too good, doesn't mean we should deliberately hamper them

Spot on

Notch wrote:Not sure you're going to win many friends with that view point laurie! It was a very clear cut red card offence under any interpretation of the laws. But why re-open old wounds eh?

Notch could you please direct me to where I have reopened any old wounds.

I think everyone knows Hogg is not that kind of player but when you watch it he had plenty of time to pull out or just 'hit' him late but not as bad if that makes sense.

He could have just shoulder barged him or dropped his shoulder and hit him in the ribcage both of which would have still seen a yellow for being late but neither would have been as dangerous as what he did.

If you notice though he followed through on Liam Williams late when he scored the try now whether that was just because of the way Williams finished it off or not you don't know but Hogg did seem pretty wound up from the off.

Two things,
1. It didn't "kill the game as a contest" wales were the far dominant team from the get go and scored a perfectly good try whilst Scotland had 15 on the pitch.

2. Is Hogg a clean player? He seemed to try and trip players a few times throughout the whole tournament and he jumped on Liam Williams knee first after scoring his try.

On Hoggs challenge - late shoulder charge well worth a yellow. Reckless contact shoulder to head shown on the replay made it a red. He did not intend to hit Biggars head - but he sure as hell made sure he gave him a late clatter.

So well worth a yellow and always at risk of a red.

What the official should have done is replayed it before carding him in order to decide the colour but no one can argue he did not make the right decision in the end.

Deluded - it was not a knee drop - but yes it was late and petulant hit on a man on the ground.

In my opinion Hogg was just trying to give dan a bit of a bump and clacking his chin was shear accident.
It was a red card offence but surely the lack of intent should surely soften the citing.
Food for thought thou I think he wouldn't have even carded a more favoured team or player, say what you want but the refs and IRB have their darling players who are immune because "they play on the edge"

Biltong wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Biltong wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26595036

56 seconds in

Thanks mate, unfortunately I cannot watch it from SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVRysNQ-STo

Thanks mate, it does look quite innocuous when at first you look at it.

I suppose the belated jump and the shoulder to the face is what made it a red card. I would however think a yellow card would have sufficed.

He was also nearly 2m out when the ball was kicked. He could have pulled out of any contact safely

In my opinion you could see Hogg setting his sights and hitting exactly where he wanted to hit.  Call it red mist of the moment in a side totally fed up with losing, call it what you will - it was red and rightly so.

Citing?  That's a citing decision.  But Hogg mucked up an entire day for Scottish fans and caused his fellow players to be humiliated and all because he sighted up a man without caring where the ball was going before or after the hit.

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Biltong wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26595036

56 seconds in

Thanks mate, unfortunately I cannot watch it from SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVRysNQ-STo

Thanks mate, it does look quite innocuous when at first you look at it.

I suppose the belated jump and the shoulder to the face is what made it a red card. I would however think a yellow card would have sufficed.

Cannot agree.  There was intent and intent to hurt. Had to go.

Yeah well, we'll have to disagree on that. Sending someone off so early in a match ruins a contest. Rather punish the team for 10 minutes and let the contest carry on there after and cite the player and give him a lengthy ban.

The public pays good money to see a contest, they expect a quality match.

Tell me about it,  I spent over 500 quid to go down there and watch the team on the wrong end of a cricket score,  but you can't nail someone like that and get away with it.

Had Hogg smashed him with a tackled,  wrapped arms and put him on his erse  yeah a yellow.  A jumping shoulder charge to the face,  I'm sorry you deserve to be given your marching orders,.

I have no issue with punishing a player, but I have a serious issue with 80 000 people having spent money and expect a contest. Even the Welsh supporters can't tell me they enjoy a thrashing like that (OK, a real rugby supporter)

I shall ignore the snide remark 're Welsh supporters.
Would you feel the same if our 10 was carted off on a stretcher after this assault?How would this have affected the contest?

bedfordwelsh wrote:I think everyone knows Hogg is not that kind of player but when you watch it he had plenty of time to pull out or just 'hit' him late but not as bad if that makes sense.

He could have just shoulder barged him or dropped his shoulder and hit him in the ribcage both of which would have still seen a yellow for being late but neither would have been as dangerous as what he did.

If you notice though he followed through on Liam Williams late when he scored the try now whether that was just because of the way Williams finished it off or not you don't know but Hogg did seem pretty wound up from the off.

Must admit that I am growing weary of this "he is not a dirty player" guff.His actions tell a different tale.Nobody is a murderer until they murder somebody.

Taffineastbourne wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Biltong wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26595036

56 seconds in

Thanks mate, unfortunately I cannot watch it from SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVRysNQ-STo

Thanks mate, it does look quite innocuous when at first you look at it.

I suppose the belated jump and the shoulder to the face is what made it a red card. I would however think a yellow card would have sufficed.

Cannot agree.  There was intent and intent to hurt. Had to go.

Yeah well, we'll have to disagree on that. Sending someone off so early in a match ruins a contest. Rather punish the team for 10 minutes and let the contest carry on there after and cite the player and give him a lengthy ban.

The public pays good money to see a contest, they expect a quality match.

Tell me about it,  I spent over 500 quid to go down there and watch the team on the wrong end of a cricket score,  but you can't nail someone like that and get away with it.

Had Hogg smashed him with a tackled,  wrapped arms and put him on his erse  yeah a yellow.  A jumping shoulder charge to the face,  I'm sorry you deserve to be given your marching orders,.

I have no issue with punishing a player, but I have a serious issue with 80 000 people having spent money and expect a contest. Even the Welsh supporters can't tell me they enjoy a thrashing like that (OK, a real rugby supporter)

I shall ignore the snide remark 're Welsh supporters.
Would you feel the same if our 10 was carted off on a stretcher after this assault?How would this have affected the contest?

Why ignore it if you think it is snide, report it.

If Biltong has a serious issue with 80k people spending money on a ticket maybe he should take it up with Hogg, the guy who nearly took Biggar's head off in an uncharacteristic yet completely cynical way, but then we know Saffa's have a very different Schalk approach Bakkies to dirty dangerous and unsporting play.

Not really sure how it's snide. He's suggesting that even fans on the winning side wouldn't particularly enjoy a thrashing like that. Then he caveats it with 'real rugby supporters' rather than those just out for an exhibition match. Of course you can take it any way you like it.

HammerofThunor wrote:Not really sure how it's snide. He's suggesting that even fans on the winning side wouldn't particularly enjoy a thrashing like that. Then he caveats it with 'real rugby supporters' rather than those just out for an exhibition match. Of course you can take it any way you like it.

Yeah, you pretty much got it, how anyone can take that as a snide comment is beyond me, but then perhaps that is why we have so many personal tete a tete's here.

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Biltong wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26595036

56 seconds in

Thanks mate, unfortunately I cannot watch it from SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVRysNQ-STo

Thanks mate, it does look quite innocuous when at first you look at it.

I suppose the belated jump and the shoulder to the face is what made it a red card. I would however think a yellow card would have sufficed.

Cannot agree.  There was intent and intent to hurt. Had to go.

Yeah well, we'll have to disagree on that. Sending someone off so early in a match ruins a contest. Rather punish the team for 10 minutes and let the contest carry on there after and cite the player and give him a lengthy ban.

The public pays good money to see a contest, they expect a quality match.

That's a sick reflection of how a sporting match should pan out. The PUBLIC have paid so go out there and be as dirty as you want, risk the lives of you opposition with late and illegal tackles. Stuff your 'good money'if you can not play the game within the rules of the game, pack a case an go watch something else.

I have been slated by many here, but this reply is disgusting.

Never saw this response when Warb's was sent off either and that was a SEMI FINAL

rainbow-warrior wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Biltong wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26595036

56 seconds in

Thanks mate, unfortunately I cannot watch it from SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVRysNQ-STo

Thanks mate, it does look quite innocuous when at first you look at it.

I suppose the belated jump and the shoulder to the face is what made it a red card. I would however think a yellow card would have sufficed.

Cannot agree.  There was intent and intent to hurt. Had to go.

Yeah well, we'll have to disagree on that. Sending someone off so early in a match ruins a contest. Rather punish the team for 10 minutes and let the contest carry on there after and cite the player and give him a lengthy ban.

The public pays good money to see a contest, they expect a quality match.

That's a sick reflection of how a sporting match should pan out.  The PUBLIC have paid so go out there and be as dirty as you want, risk the lives of you opposition with late and illegal tackles.  Stuff your 'good money'if you can not play the game within the rules of the game, pack a case an go watch something else.

I have been slated by many here, but this reply is disgusting.

Never saw this response when Warb's was sent off either and that was a SEMI FINAL

Can you run that by me again?

Please explain how this is a disgusting comment.

Then also explain to me how Warburton's red card is not applicable to the same scenario?

I also didn't bring in the Bismarck red card of last year. Simply because the issue I am addressing here is not about one player or one match, it is about how I see the Red card effect matches.

No where have I suggested the player that commits foul play should not be punished, look at the big picture and ask yourself why you watch rugby. I watch rugby to see a contest, simple as that, I recorded the Welsh vs Scotland match to watch after Super rugby, then I read the scoreline of 52-3, I didn't even bother to watch the match, any match that I record with a scoreline that suggests a routing I don't bother to watch, as it is not a contest.

My whole point here is about being able to enjoy a contest, not a routing.

Biltong wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:

Biltong wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Biltong wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Biltong wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26595036

56 seconds in

Thanks mate, unfortunately I cannot watch it from SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVRysNQ-STo

Thanks mate, it does look quite innocuous when at first you look at it.

I suppose the belated jump and the shoulder to the face is what made it a red card. I would however think a yellow card would have sufficed.

Cannot agree.  There was intent and intent to hurt. Had to go.

Yeah well, we'll have to disagree on that. Sending someone off so early in a match ruins a contest. Rather punish the team for 10 minutes and let the contest carry on there after and cite the player and give him a lengthy ban.

The public pays good money to see a contest, they expect a quality match.

That's a sick reflection of how a sporting match should pan out.  The PUBLIC have paid so go out there and be as dirty as you want, risk the lives of you opposition with late and illegal tackles.  Stuff your 'good money'if you can not play the game within the rules of the game, pack a case an go watch something else.

I have been slated by many here, but this reply is disgusting.

Never saw this response when Warb's was sent off either and that was a SEMI FINAL

Can you run that by me again?

Please explain how this is a disgusting comment.

Then also explain to me how Warburton's red card is not applicable to the same scenario?

I also didn't bring in the Bismarck red card of last year. Simply because the issue I am addressing here is not about one player or one match, it is about how I see the Red card effect matches.

No where have I suggested the player that commits foul play should not be punished, look at the big picture and ask yourself why you watch rugby. I watch rugby to see a contest, simple as that, I recorded the Welsh vs Scotland match to watch after Super rugby, then I read the scoreline of 52-3, I didn't even bother to watch the match, any match that I record with a scoreline that suggests a routing I don't bother to watch, as it is not a contest.

My whole point here is about being able to enjoy a contest, not a routing.

...and to enjoy a contest you would ignore the safety of the players? You have seen the footage and YOU think it was a yellow card offence, the majority and in that majority many many Scottish fans, agree it was a red. I watch rugby to see a great game NOT to see men trying to break each others necks or damage each other in any way. A one on one slap fine but not out and out assault on another no. Let me also tell you, the score would have been pretty similar with or without Hogg. I live in NZ and I never watch Super Basketball.

Biltong wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

Biltong wrote:

GavinDragon wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26595036

56 seconds in

Thanks mate, unfortunately I cannot watch it from SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVRysNQ-STo

Thanks mate, it does look quite innocuous when at first you look at it.

I suppose the belated jump and the shoulder to the face is what made it a red card. I would however think a yellow card would have sufficed.

Rainbow Warrior, here was my first response. I said I understand why it is deemed a red card, but I thought a yellow card would suffice. Is that now disgusting in your view?

If it is, then we clearly see contact sport in a different light.

Now my question to you, where did I say ignore the safety of the players?

Explain.

I must say Biltong I see a lot to like in your suggestion that a red carded player be replaced by a reserve, in fact i would have no qualms if suspensions were extended to avoid those of devious thoughts trying to manipulate or undermine such a system. further it would retain the contest ie 15 players versus 15 players.

But, to be fair, players should go in with the mindset that they 'must not' do anything silly or else they will single handedly lose the game for their team and p1ss off a whole lot of people (including fans). Red cards are not common so what's the issue? It needs to be a deterrent or else you'll have teams buck the system somehow.

ebop wrote:But, to be fair, players should go in with the mindset that they 'must not' do anything silly or else they will single handedly lose the game for their team and p1ss off a whole lot of people (including fans). Red cards are not common so what's the issue? It needs to be a deterrent or else you'll have teams buck the system somehow.

ebop, I have no problem that a red card exists, I am merely throwing ideas around to see whether there is a solution to keeping it a contest.

It could be easily a contest if players didn't go to deliberately hurt their fellow players. Come on this Hogg incident wasn't by accident or just a little scuffle. You don't see many red cards and when you do it's for a good reason. I was miffed when the red was shown but that was directed at Hogg for being such a tool!

Biltong I think this is being discussed not because of red cards but because Scottland were so poor.

If the score was closer we wouldn't be discussing this.

Where there have been red cards in the past teams have had enough pride to carry on playing to keep it a contest.

bitlong,

The laws are there to punish red card offenders (both the player and the team). You can't just have a ten-minute sinbin and then sub the player as this isn't enough of a deterrent. It's human nature to seek advantage and loop-holes in systems that exist. Doing what you suggest, to ensure the contest is maintained, could benefit a cynical approach.

If a player is seen to commit a red card during a game (not as a citing) then he, and his team, need to be punished there and then. If the punishment is retrospective there's no real reason (other than human conscience, which we can't rely on) not to commit repeated acts of foul play as necessary. The team who have the foul play committed against them suffer with possible injuries and the next side the offending team play when the ban takes place is at an advantage. This last part is an unavoidable bi-product of the citing system but which makes it even more important to penalise foul play there and then if possible.

If the game becomes a non-contest then that is the fault of the player and his team, not the laws. As others have mentioned red cards are pretty rare which shows that, by and large, there's no real issue as the deterrent is working.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It could be easily a contest if players didn't go to deliberately hurt their fellow players. Come on this Hogg incident wasn't by accident or just a little scuffle. You don't see many red cards and when you do it's for a good reason. I was miffed when the red was shown but that was directed at Hogg for being such a tool!

Lets take a few examples.

Bismarck du Plessis goes into a tackle where he absolutely nails Dan Carter in a text book tackle, he receives a yellow card, next infringement he gets an automatic red. contest ruined.

Hogg, goes on after the ball is kicked and jumps into the Biggar and he goes down. Yes he injured him, whether there was intent to take him out of the game is at best speculation. We cannot prove intent. Red card contest ruined.

Warburton tips a French player, red card contest is ruined.

In 2010 Mitchell from AUstrlia is yellow carded for a supposed late tackle which never occurred, a little later in the match he gets another yellow and is red carded, contest ruined.

These are of the top of my head 4 examples of which two should never have been a red card.

Both mistakes by the officials, so we have contests ruined due to official errors, the score line in both matches and the results immediately becomes a farce.

MY concern is that there are many complaints about referee errors, there are lot of complaints about interpretation of laws, all have the effect of ruining contests and results.

We also need to look at how cards affect matches.

Wales managed to keep the France semi final a contest despite an early red card.
The reason Scotland got royally spanked is because they are rubbish and lost heart. The red card just exaggerated what was already the case, and as with the Italians its quite common to see players in a struggling team lose it and do things that are outside the realms of normal gameplay. Wales kept their discipline and didnt respond by chucking punches or looking for revenge.
Cards also serve to ensure that a player who has lost it is taken out of the action, so they dont do it again and so that they are not in the firing line for revenge. They are very much a nuclear option all the same.

But in terms of what the OP says yes there has been card creep over the years. The metric for what does and doesnt get one, especially yellows has shifted around a fair bit but has gradually gone toward higher usage for lesser offences, although at the same time incidents of what is now considered serious foul play have dropped.
Even more so with the TMO reviews.
Coupled with that there was the IRB medical reviews of dangerous play that was causing serious injuries a few years back which led to higher penalties for charging at the ruck and tip tackles. The first year or two pundits were proclaiming the end of rugby. Now players have adapted their game and we see them happen less and punished less.

Theres no hard line on what should or shouldnt be foul play. Rugby league allows forearms smashes and doesnt require wrapping the tackle, although theres some horrible examples of nasty concussions as a result.

Rugby is getting softer, but then players are getting bigger faster and more able to cause serious physical hard through reckless play. As much as we dont want to see games ruined by cards we dont want to see games and careers ruined through serious injury.

In terms of thuggery Hogg isnt really up there with the likes of Haluafia though is he.

Biltong wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It could be easily a contest if players didn't go to deliberately hurt their fellow players. Come on this Hogg incident wasn't by accident or just a little scuffle. You don't see many red cards and when you do it's for a good reason. I was miffed when the red was shown but that was directed at Hogg for being such a tool!

Lets take a few examples.

Bismarck du Plessis goes into a tackle where he absolutely nails Dan Carter in a text book tackle, he receives a yellow card, next infringement he gets an automatic red. contest ruined.

Hogg, goes on after the ball is kicked and jumps into the Biggar and he goes down. Yes he injured him, whether there was intent to take him out of the game is at best speculation. We cannot prove intent. Red card contest ruined.

Warburton tips a French player, red card contest is ruined.

In 2010 Mitchell from AUstrlia is yellow carded for a supposed late tackle which never occurred, a little later in the match he gets another yellow and is red carded, contest ruined.

These are of the top of my head 4 examples of which two should never have been a red card.

Both mistakes by the officials, so we have contests ruined due to official errors, the score line in both matches and the results immediately becomes a farce.

MY concern is that there are many complaints about referee errors, there are lot of complaints about interpretation of laws, all have the effect of ruining contests and results.

We also need to look at how cards affect matches.

Bismarck shouldn't have received a yellow for his first but was brain dead for the 2nd imo. Why risk anything like that. Bit of fault on both sides?
Think the vast majority think Hogg should have received a red.
Warburton should have received a red, sorry don't know that final one.

I would agree that reds do influence the game and spoil the contest; but that's because they're supposed to.

Mitchell got the second yellow for throwing the ball away and stopping a quick line-out didn't he?

If that's the incident I'm thinking of that's just plain stupid on the part of the player (like when Care did it a few years back) and I'm all for that being punished as it's cynical and doesn't allow the attacking side to build any momentum or keep the game flowing.

Biltong are you still just smarting from Botha getting banned 5 years ago?

Cyril wrote:Mitchell got the second yellow for throwing the ball away and stopping a quick line-out didn't he?

If that's the incident I'm thinking of that's just plain stupid on the part of the player (like when Care did it a few years back) and I'm all for that being punished as it's cynical and doesn't allow the attacking side to build any momentum or keep the game flowing.

That was Youngs, Care got his for charging in a ruck

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Cyril wrote:Mitchell got the second yellow for throwing the ball away and stopping a quick line-out didn't he?

If that's the incident I'm thinking of that's just plain stupid on the part of the player (like when Care did it a few years back) and I'm all for that being punished as it's cynical and doesn't allow the attacking side to build any momentum or keep the game flowing.

That was Youngs, Care got his for charging in a ruck

Ah, yes Youngs. That was when MJ smashed chunks out of the seat in front, wasn't it?

I imagine Brian Moore hissed something like 'imbecile' too.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Wales managed to keep the France semi final a contest despite an early red card.
The reason Scotland got royally spanked is because they are rubbish and lost heart. The red card just exaggerated what was already the case, and as with the Italians its quite common to see players in a struggling team lose it and do things that are outside the realms of normal gameplay. Wales kept their discipline and didnt respond by chucking punches or looking for revenge.
Cards also serve to ensure that a player who has lost it is taken out of the action, so they dont do it again and so that they are not in the firing line for revenge. They are very much a nuclear option all the same.

But in terms of what the OP says yes there has been card creep over the years. The metric for what does and doesnt get one, especially yellows has shifted around a fair bit but has gradually gone toward higher usage for lesser offences, although at the same time incidents of what is now considered serious foul play have dropped.
Even more so with the TMO reviews.
Coupled with that there was the IRB medical reviews of dangerous play that was causing serious injuries a few years back which led to higher penalties for charging at the ruck and tip tackles. The first year or two pundits were proclaiming the end of rugby. Now players have adapted their game and we see them happen less and punished less.

Theres no hard line on what should or shouldnt be foul play. Rugby league allows forearms smashes and doesnt require wrapping the tackle, although theres some horrible examples of nasty concussions as a result.

Rugby is getting softer, but then players are getting bigger faster and more able to cause serious physical hard through reckless play. As much as we dont want to see games ruined by cards we dont want to see games and careers ruined through serious injury.

In terms of thuggery Hogg isnt really up there with the likes of Haluafia though is he.

When was the time Scotland managed to keep a full 15 on the field against Wales ?

And didn't a big RL star get banned recently for a shoulder charge or not wrapping ?

Even South African supporters can see that foul play must be punished and discouraged and the impact on a contest is a red herring.If players feel that they have a free shot with any punishment deferred until after the event games like the RWC Final would become bloodbath.

I just read Biltong's comment as being that a real rugby supporter wouldn't get much out of an easy victory against a 14-mean team. I agree with that, it all felt a bit pointless at the ground and I felt sorry for Scotland, particularly the guys who'd travelled so far to watch the game. But I don't think ultimately you can use that as a reason not to send people off, just to keep it for really serious offences.

The only other deterrent I can think of would be a points deduction (-14) but that would be silly and still open it up for manipulation. And there'd be scores of -7 v 35.