Seth wrote:Exactly, weve already enough subjectivity without another layer on intent and longer VR interventions to try and gauge what the player was thinking by the look of intent on his face and his body language.
I'll end on that they already look at mitigating factors already - several references by refs explaining their decisions this week - so no real difference to what I agree can be a ridiculously drawn out vr process. But fair enough if you prefer what they're running with now. I can see it wrecking a lot of games though.
"Look, I'd never use injuries as an excuse..." Daryl Powell
Clearwing wrote:I think it could be managed better. Where the contact is accidental/unavoidable (and I don't think the Watts one was btw) then send the player off but allow a replacement on after 10 mins has elapsed. That'd keep players focused on avoiding causing harm, would incentivise clubs to coach them not to do so but crucially wouldn't ruin a contest from an early stage.
This is a key point though isn’t it? Sending players off for controversial, process-driven infringement can often ruin games as contests. What are we trying to achieve with this?
Maybe send the player off and force the club to use a sub or something I don’t know: but unless someone has done something terrible and obvious let’s keep 13 v 13 please.
Clearwing wrote:I'll end on that they already look at mitigating factors already - several references by refs explaining their decisions this week - so no real difference to what I agree can be a ridiculously drawn out vr process. But fair enough if you prefer what they're running with now. I can see it wrecking a lot of games though.
I don't prefer it, far from, I just don't think that's a workable solution.
If we get red cards regularly like the Watts one I think the game is in big trouble. Dupree was dipping into contact, it wasn’t intentional foul play. Players will start dipping, crouching, head down etc and look to get penalties and red cards given which will turn the game into a farce. We are already seeing players yelping at the ref for anything vaguely high and others running in , arms in the the air.
2 games for that Tom Amone tackle is a joke and can anyone explain how Kaide Ellis gets away with nothing from the tackle on Hooley where Watts is looking at 4 games?! its ridiculous.
Seth wrote:2 games for that Tom Amone tackle is a joke and can anyone explain how Kaide Ellis gets away with nothing from the tackle on Hooley where Watts is looking at 4 games?! its ridiculous.
I cant see anything wrong with the Amone tackle, games gone if thats a ban.
The inconsistency is a real problem, its like they just pick a punishment out of a hat and dont relate it to any other decision.
Interesting article on Yorkshire Live about rumours that the NRL are looking to buy SL. That might put an end to the influx of new and unrealistic rules and at least assure consistency in the way the game is played. Wouldn't relish a return to winter rugby (as reported) though.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
