Seeing Yellow

The colour yellow often conjures up negative connotations: cowardice, Jewish discrimination, Coldplay.

When the ref shows a yellow card, it is either met with howls of protest - see Du Plessis' first yellow card at Eden Park - or cries of joy. People either bay for the blood of the yellow card recipient and wish hot pokers and fire on him and his descendants or they howl at the injustice of the world and curse the ref and his descendants and wish hot pokers and fire upon he and his brethren for eternity.

Sometimes the difference between a red card and yellow card offence get questioned. Warburton saw red in the RWC semi and Payne was sent off for knocking out the feet of Goode after an equally short time on the field. Some swore this was the correct decision. Others just swore. And swore some more.

Equally the difference between a yellow card and a penalty offence is often blurred. He wasn't warned, he was warned too much. The ref has already a lot to look at and I was impressed Poite was keeping a mental count of how many ruck infringements the sides were committing last week. What misses the attention of the ref gets spotted by the touch judge only for his judgment to be questioned to the point where we doubt whether he saw what he claimed to have seen.

A yellow card is for cynical play and not as severe as foul play. Biting, punching and eye gouging, tip tackles; these are clear enough red card offences. Except they're not. Head high tackles, deliberate slowing down of ball, deliberate knock-ons; these are clear enough yellow card offences. Except they're not. We can all bring to mind examples that were met with yellow or red cards and the same kinds of incidents that escaped any kind of sanction. We want consistency from refs but is it too much to ask for consistency between refs?

If a yellow card is for cynical play and a red card for dangerous play, do we have a clear understanding of the definitions of cynical and dangerous? Is giving away a penalty always cynical? Is there a certain area on the field where things appear to be more cynical or does repeated infringement make something outwardly trivial intrinsically cynical?

If at first you get a yellow card, don't do it again. If at first you don't get a yellow card, try, try and try again. One of my pet hates is the stray boot from a ruck. From the side, see the ball, give it a boot out of the ruck. Play on. Play on? Ah bakin' powder?

Do you think some refs are too trigger happy with yellow cards and some don't reach often enough for the naughty notes? Feel free to vent your anger at past injustices or things you'd like to see clamped down in the future. Don't be shy. We're all friends here. Communication, like refereeing, is the key.

There's a grey area but if you put yourself in a position where you could get red carded you only have yourself to blame.

In tackling someone if you lift someone up like Warburton did there is the risk of a card. In  Payne's case by not jumping into the air and not looking like was competing for the ball he put himself at risk of a card.

Perhaps Ref's shouldn't but they do judge an incident on how dangerous it looks.

Both the Warburton and Goode incidents look horrific.


It is still bizarre that BOD could be spear tackled by two players yet neither got punished.

I would say that's one of the worst examples of getting away with it.

Look at this incident - thoughts?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn7sXouUXBI

Not even a YC for this.


I do think that the refs need to have more clarification on what to do in certain situations.

Is a punch a RC or YC? Twice I have seen punches only get a YC - Brits punching Farrell and Manu punching Ashton.


I still think there's a huge amount of inconsistency in rugby - I think you could extend this to forward passes, TMOs and tries given or not given as well.

I think the quality of reffing should definitely be higher. Unfortunately I feel that too often the ref's interpretation/that of the TMO becomes more important than the players on the pitch! It can work for you and against you of course.

beshocked this didn't even get a yellow for Brial. Just a penalty: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a51-vckZrIE

In fairness to the ref and touch judges that day, Umaga and Mealamu's dump tackle on BOD were off the ball. How they escaped a disciplinary hearing is beyond me.

Does he connect? Throwing a punch and missing is obviously different. Not saying he doesn't deserve a punishment just there is a grey area.

Part of me wants to see TMOs consulted on cards so the ref can take the heat of the moment out of it. I know they can be used for foul play but hell McAlister's yellow would have been nice to have been rescinded.

The Lions should have been able to protest to the ref and recommend a TMO replay. Would have been a red to one IMO.

Barnes gives straight reds for punching. But how dangerous is a punch. What should happen if Aaron Smith throws a haymaker at Will Skelton? Does the ref card Smith if he actually reaches Skelton's jaw? (He'd probably need to stand on a forward)

Kicking pill out of a ruck deserves a card. So do people that get up slowly and deliberately so that the halfback has to skirt around them to fire a pass. I think those that get hard done by are those that get pinged for not rolling away because they have 120kg of fat c**t on top of them. Sometimes the way people fall in the tackle makes a collapsed maul and that's hard luck. It's the same with people not being able to roll away.

I find this fascinating, and as a ref I'll hold my hands up and say it is impossible to see anymore than 50% of what goes on on the pitch, at anyone time there are 3/4 incidents players want to talk about, the best you can do is trust your training puts you in the right position, to see as much as possible, and then pray you take a breath and consider whats happened before making the decision. (Not that I'm anywhere near pro standard)

I read Owens book a few years ago, as I was getting into it, and he mentions his first ever international. Went well, the week after had nothing on so went down to the pitch and took an U16 club game, a nothing game with just kids wanting to play. HE totally lost control, lost his temper and totally lost the plot, took abuse from all fans and parents, and at the end of it, circled everyone in and apologies for his performance.

The ruck is the biggest issue for me though, so many people in rucks doing so many things, some on purpose, some accidentally and others can do nothing about where theyve ended up, then there are the odd few who constantly end up in the wrong places yelling i'm trapped i'm trapped.
I like to tell players from the outset, don't get yourself in the wrong position, and you won't get pinged, get trapped at the bottom of the wrong side of the ruck and I'll ping you every time, so make efforts to get out on your own side, you'll be amazed how few players get trapped by accident after the first few soft penalties!

Another case is Brits swing at Farell in a ruck on the Lions build up game, had he connected Farell was sleeping, that is a case of outcome saving Brits!

I think you wrote this article just for the Coldplay joke.....

Hit a nerve did I FES?

Say what you like about their music, so long as it's negative, but Chris Martin dumping that health freak, bee-sting-chested wife of his and shacking up with a 24-year-old junk food, smoking vixen demands respect.

"You know how I know you're gay? Cause you like Coldplay".

One of the best put downs in cinema-and I'm actually a Coldplay fan.

Maybe their next single will be a cover of Slayer's Angel Of Death if this new bit of crumpet has any influence...

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Hit a nerve did I FES?

Say what you like about their music, so long as it's negative, but Chris Martin dumping that health freak, bee-sting-chested wife of his and shacking up with a 24-year-old junk food, smoking vixen demands respect.

+100

There's no two ways about it, he's traded up massively!

beshocked wrote:Does he connect? Throwing a punch and missing is obviously different. Not saying he doesn't deserve a punishment just there is a grey area.

I think he connected beshocked. It's just that his punches were softer than my shoite after a heavy night on the turps.

Here's another one where Ali Williams escapes punishment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt2H_qcQc6E

Handbags after a cheeky shoulder a couple of seconds after the ref blows up. You'd look back at that and say it was nothing that riled Williams and he should've saw yellow. But the ref just gave him a warning.

Compare that to Matfield's tackle on Kelleher, which I think saw him leave the field after the incident. Is it late? Is it high? Nothing came of that but in those days there was no TMO and without the benefit of the right angle, I wouldn't want to call that at real time or be the touch judge to report it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGezK_0cAcI

Schalk Burger's gouging of Luke Fitzgerald in the Lions test was a straightforward red card, but unbelievably the ref only gave a yellow, perhaps cowed by the fact that the offence occurred so early in the game.

There are too many "flavour of the year" yellows, where the press focus whip up a storm over an offence being the greatest sin - a few years ago it was tackling a player who is in the air; more recently spear tackles have assumed that mantle. I'm not denying those may be grievous offences, but some are more clear cut than others

"Payne was sent off for knocking out the feet of Goode"

I didn't hear about that one, was it an important game?

Not really. Some obscure European club game.

Andy or Alex Goode?

I'm not at liberty to say.

I don't think Andy Goode could get that far off the ground.

I think it shows that refs are people. The rules are set out to deal with certain situations but multiple rules can be infringed at any point of contact and it depends on which rule the ref chooses to enforce and severity of that foul.

You tend to find that ref's don't want to bin someone in the first 5-10 minutes of a game and a lot of stuff is gotten away with during that early period.

I also find that if there is a break in the play when the foul is committed the longer the ref takes to assess and make a decision the more stringent/severe they will be. For Payne/Goode as an example, if the ref had run straight in and said in the air, yellow card, there would have been roars from the crowd for a minute and everyone would have carried on. But he didn't make his decision on what he saw at the time, it was multiple slow motion replays of a nasty clash in the air and impact onto the ground where seeing someone essentially knocked unconscious over and over again nudged the ref into giving a red card. I'd even go so far to say if Payne hadn't gotten up and stayed down for treatment he probably wouldn't have been sent off either.

Does any of that change the technicalities of the infringement? No. But it does, even subconsciously, go into the thought process of the referee.

The key for me is for the referee to be quite and decisive. Commentators and fans tend to give them benefit of the doubt in those situations, it's where they take their time to be more rational that commentators and fans have the time themselves to come up with alternative assessments. If the ref makes the decision quickly, then commentators will rationalise the ref's decision for the viewer before coming up with the alternative (nipping the dispute in the bud to a certain extent).

Maybe that's just me.

http://www.rugbydump.com/2014/04/3672/jared-payne-banned-for-two-weeks-after-red-card-challenge-on-alex-goode

I think in general refs are harsher when a player's welfare is at risk. Goode could have broken his neck. Rightly or wrongly how injured players are can make a difference.

I would say that there needs to be a general understanding on contesting for the ball in the air - e.g. do both players need to jump in the air for it to count as contesting?


Ref was put in a tough position - open to your own intepretation whether he was right or wrong.

It doesn't help that refs are so different. In the Goode-Payne case a ref like Allain Rolland probably wouldn't have even given a card.

Those are good points bandwagon.

Sometimes you feel when the ref thinks he has seen enough to act on, you wish he had consulted the TMO. I can't remember who the ref was but when Billy Vunipola was yellow carded for a high tackle, I at first agreed that it looked high. After the replay, it didn't seem that bad at all and probably not even a cause for a penalty. Certainly no different to the Jane tackle on Folau a week ago.

Then you have Poite who consults the video ref after the du Plessis tackle on Carter and only listens to his view of the aftermath of the tackle and gives a yellow because he is convinced the tackle was dangerous.

Personally, a card offence can change the course of the game so I don't mind the game being paused to consult the TMO or at least the ref can get a second look on the big screen. That might, as you say, be more likely to increase the severity of the penalty but I would prefer that to an unfair advantage being given to a team for something that didn't deserve a yellow card.

kiakahaatoearoa yes I agree but then where do you draw the line with the TMO?

When does the ref make his own call? I thought the AP final last season was really poorly officiated because of the horrific lack of consistency with usage of the TMO. Plus it again showed the ambiguity when it comes to awarding tries. I know we are talking about cards but it's linked because it's down to reffing interpretations.

There must be more consistency when it comes to usage of TMO in all situations. E.g. perhaps have a situation where a team has challenges like they have in tennis (e.g. 3 challenges for the 80 minutes where they can get the ref to check an incident like a YC or a try).

I think that would make things fairer because we understand refs are human - they miss things. 3 in 80 minutes is not much.

First of all I think you have to find a TMO who is up to the task. I don't know what Ayoub has over somebody but it must be pretty big to have got the job.

There is that option in cricket of contesting the umpire's decision and you have a finite number and I don't think that undermines the refs. They're human and it can be difficult to see. The same occurs in tennis but in those sports you're talking about specific moments and situations. Check to see if that would've hit the wickets or he got a nick to it. Was that touching the line or was it out? If the captain was able to pinpoint a specific issue then it seems fair for the ref to check that but I agree there should be a limited amount of times to do that.

Frankly what I would like to see is the TMO not actually ruling on any of the offences. All the top-tier stadiums have a big screen. The TMO should be like a video technician. George, could you replay for me the final pass before that try. Then the ref acts on what he sees. His authority is not undermined by differing opinions and he is the one who is able to see it up close and slowed down. After every TMO stoppage, he explains his ruling to both captains and the game resumes. I find it perplexing the question 'is there any reason not to award the try' and the TMO looks at a grounding, doesn't see the ball after 20 painfully slow viewings of the wrong angle and then comes back with no, there is no reason not to award the try. subtext nor is there a reason to award the try. I can't see s....

The ref asks for the specific play and asks for the specific angle and then makes his ruling. I can't see the ball there but I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt and award the try or I can't see the ball there but the defender's arm is last seen going under the ball so I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and say he held him up. We might disagree with the ref but at least he has been transparent in his decision and that's all we can ask for.

As soon as you invite somebody else to have their say like a touch judge, the ref should get the TMO to replay that specific footage and then make his mind up. I'm going by what the touch judge or video ref said is where I think the process falls apart. The ref must be sole judge. The TMO and touch judges should be there to help him rather than do his work for him.

I agree kiakahaatorea.

Too much ambiguity in general in my opinion.

Equally it seems inconsistent to award a try when the ref says - Is it a try Yes or No and the footage is inconclusive.

There has to be some sort of inbuilt consistent ruling - either consistently give benefit of the doubt to the attacking side or to the defending side.

Consistency is the ideal situation we want to be in. As it stands there's far too much open to interpretation.

I agree that the ref needs to have the final say not the TMO.