Yellow and Red Card Issuance stats

The other day I stumbled (well, Googled) across a rather well written blog post by Biltong from 3 years ago where he looked at the numbers of yellow cards issued (see here). Given recent controversies I decided to have a crack at updating his analysis - see below for the resulting table

Comparing the 2 sets of stats I observed the following:
*South Africa, Argentina, England & Ireland have carried on "earning" cards at a similar rate over the past 3 years to prior
*France and Wales have been carded slightly more often over the past 3 years
*NZ and Australia are being carded at a much higher rate over the past 3 years - Australia have received 31 YCs and NZ 27 since September 2013 when Biltong compiled his stats. That's a YC every 1.8 matches for both teams. In NZ's case, they're conceding nearly double the number of YCs per year since 2013 as they did in the years 2000 - 2013. That suggests either both teams are infringing more than they used to, or the weight of complaints from other nations has been heeded by refs. Or both of course.
*Samoa get carded a lot less than their PI neighbours Fiji and Tonga. And I have no idea why.
*Georgia can barely complete a match without getting carded
*There is a slight but statistically significant correlation between card issuance rate and win rate - so if you're getting carded more you're winning less
*Japan do pretty well on card issuance - given their style of play and that they tend to field lighter packs this isn't surprising
*France and Ireland are significantly less carded than their fellow 6N nations. Does this mean they're infringing less? Or better at hiding things from the refs? Or are their refs dishing out more cards, and since they don't ref their own that's inflating other countries' card rates? Or (D) all of the above?

Yellow and Red Card issuance by country since 2000


(Stats sourced from ESPN)

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:
*France and Ireland are significantly less carded than their fellow 6N nations. Does this mean they're infringing less? Or better at hiding things from the refs? Or are their refs dishing out more cards, and since they don't ref their own that's inflating other countries' card rates? Or (D) all of the above?

France and Ireland are significantly less cynical than the sides above them?  Makes a change from the usual narrative and great to realise the reputation we once held as a natural 'black arts' side was all lies

God, this Autumn just keeps giving.

SecretFly wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:
*France and Ireland are significantly less carded than their fellow 6N nations. Does this mean they're infringing less? Or better at hiding things from the refs? Or are their refs dishing out more cards, and since they don't ref their own that's inflating other countries' card rates? Or (D) all of the above?

France and Ireland are significantly less cynical than the sides above them?  Makes a change from the usual narrative and great to realise the reputation we once held as a natural 'black arts' side was all lies

God, this Autumn just keeps giving.

Well there's being cynical and then there's being good caught doing it, perhaps ireland are better at hiding it? ;p

When Elliot Daly received his red, commentators were saying it was England's first red since Lewis Moody 2005. And yet Joe Launchbury was cited and banned just last week.

I'd like to see statistics fully reflect citing decisions, since Launchbury's act was deemed worth of a red. Similarly, the All Blacks have retrospective red card history with the likes of Andrew Hore and - if I remember correctly - Dan Carter.

SecretFly wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:
*France and Ireland are significantly less carded than their fellow 6N nations. Does this mean they're infringing less? Or better at hiding things from the refs? Or are their refs dishing out more cards, and since they don't ref their own that's inflating other countries' card rates? Or (D) all of the above?

France and Ireland are significantly less cynical than the sides above them?  Makes a change from the usual narrative and great to realise the reputation we once held as a natural 'black arts' side was all lies

God, this Autumn just keeps giving.

Ireland: almost as saintly as the French

New Zealand is the only nation on the list with no Red Cards?

Rugby Fan wrote:When Elliot Daly received his red, commentators were saying it was England's first red since Lewis Moody 2005. And yet Joe Launchbury was cited and banned just last week.

I'd like to see statistics fully reflect citing decisions, since Launchbury's act was deemed worth of a red. Similarly, the All Blacks have retrospective red card history with the likes of Andrew Hore and - if I remember correctly - Dan Carter.

Hore, and IIRC Mealamu. Not Carter though - again, IIRC

I did a quick google and found the following players given long term bans in internationals (6 weeks+), couldn't find a full list though. Note the source was Walesonline, so is quite possibly Love sacks.

Burger (SA)
Galarza (Arg)
Azam (FR)
Saulo (Fiji)
Pape (FR)
Parisse (Ita)
Grau (Arg)
Ma. Bergamasco (Ita)
Ghiraldini (Ita)
M. Jones (Wal)
I Evans (Wal)
B Botha (SA)
Grewcock (Eng)
Hartley (Eng)

doctor_grey wrote:New Zealand is the only nation on the list with no Red Cards?  

List is since 2000. Argentina had none in that time before Saturday ...


Given how infrequently red cards are issued in international rugby it's impossible to make any statistically significant conclusions - hence why I looked at yellows


Technically NZ have never received a red card - they didn't exist in rugby prior to the late '90s when the IRB introduced yellows, before that the ref just pointed at the sideline to send someone off

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:...Hore, and IIRC Mealamu. Not Carter though - again, IIRC

Just did a quick search and this is what I had in mind:

http://www.rugbydump.com/2009/11/1168/dan-carter-suspended-for-a-week-following-high-tackle

I think, in effect, the ban means the disciplinary committee agreed it was a red card offence. Same as Launchbury & Fekitoa.

The NZ camp wasn't happy:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10609376

Now that McCaw has taken his invisibility cloak away with him, that NZ likelihood has probably doubled. 

That, and because they are extremely dirty, obviously. 

I think some of it will come down to individual refs and the player/teams ability to adapt to that particular refs interpretation, especially the good old team yellow for infringing at the breakdown.
Most will come down to forwards being stupid, backs being misunderstood

Rugby Fan wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:...Hore, and IIRC Mealamu. Not Carter though - again, IIRC

Just did a quick search and this is what I had in mind:

http://www.rugbydump.com/2009/11/1168/dan-carter-suspended-for-a-week-following-high-tackle

I think, in effect, the ban means the disciplinary committee agreed it was a red card offence. Same as Launchbury & Fekitoa.

The NZ camp wasn't happy:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10609376

I was at that match, I remember a fair few Welshmen swearing at the ref at the time (granted the little old bloke in front of me had done nothing but scream swearwords the whole match), in my memory it was given a retrospective yellow, clearly mind playing tricks ....

Rugby Fan wrote:

The NZ camp wasn't happy:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10609376

Shock

Some work on the stats I'd find it difficult to say anything based on cards alone other than weaker teams tend to get carded more. Cards vs penalties would be interesting.