Yellow cards

Something I have been thinking for a while. In Ice hockey were the sin bin concept really started when a goal is scored the yellow card ends. Should rugby do something similar? maybe if 6 pts are scored the yellow is over - the team has had enough advantage? In the leinster dragons game ( as an example only chaps) 12 pts were scored during the yellow card and it turned the game.

so should the yellow be over once 6pts are scored ( or pick another number)?

In feild hockey they now have 3 cards green is a warning, yellow sin bin, red is off - again would this be useful in rugby? If you get a gereen for say offside then next time that person is caught they get a yellow.

TJ wrote:In feild hockey they now have 3 cards green is a warning, yellow sin bin, red is off - again would this be useful in rugby?  If you get a gereen for say offside then next time that person is caught they get a yellow.

That could mean 15 (!) warnings before a yellow card is actually given, not sure i agree with that!

As for the ice hockey example i completely agree and i always have the feeling that when a try is scored the yellow carded player should come back. Also i think there is too much difference between a red and a yellow, i would like a card which is lets say worth 2 tries for the opposition.

I am not so sure that there is too much wrong with the system as it is to be honest. I think bring in more cards or setting certain points for expiry of yellows may over complicate things and add even more confusion. ref's have a hard enough job being consistent as it is. These are just my thoughts but I do understand where you are coming from.

A yellow card to last the length of the rest of a game if the player is not likeable or has whiskers that make him look like an eejit. Otherwise the yellow should last until the ref turns his back and the player scoots back on unnoticed.

I think it's currently about right as it is (though not necessarily how it is policed).

I remember reading that a yellow card was usually worth an average of 10 points to the opposition.

Ideally, the punishment should be enough to dissuade a player or side from committing the offence. Otherwise you just encourage cynicism and more offending (like the suggestion of reducing the points for penalty kicks - you just end up with more penalties).

At the end of the day, carding a player is not just there to punish the transgressor it's to encourage a more open, flowing game. Players 'taking one for the team' is one of the more annoying aspects of the game and reducing the punishment or 'off' time could encourage this type of mindset.

Having said all that, coaches and players will always find ways to use gamesmanship to swing the risk/reward outcome in their favour.

Reduced points - more penalties - more yellows - less players - more room - better rugby - more tries.

EX-cellent, Cyril. You've solved everything.

If the offender comes back on when a try is scored then a yellow becomes pretty meaningless.

Often, as a flanker, I find myself deliberately slowing ball, going offside or impeding the scrum half in our "red zone" because I'm pretty sure that a try is imminent. One poster on these boards told me that a yellow in those circumstances was, "Taking one for the team".

With TJ's proposal my thought process would be; stay legal give away 5/7 points , commit an offence get a yellow concede 5/7 points and come straight back on OR commit an offence get away with it concede nil points. Hmm, that's a tricky one...

And I'm not even a kiwi.

No, ten minutes (and points) seems fair.

However, I would like to see ref's being quicker to card front rows who are unable to stay on their feet till the scrum is over.