UC expert says 15 on 14 is a blight on the game of rugby
university-of-canterbury
Tue Sep 17 2013 12:00:00 GMT+1200 (New Zealand Standard Time)
UC expert says 15 on 14 is a blight on the game of rugby
Tuesday, 17 September 2013, 3:36 pm
Press Release: University of Canterbury
UC expert says 15 on 14 is a blight on the game of rugby
September 17, 2013
A University of Canterbury (UC) economics expert has come out against rugby’s rules which allow a team of 15 players to play against a side of 14 players for part of the game.
UC economics and finance lecturer Dr Seamus Hogan says he really hates 15 on 14 rugby. He was referring to the Rugby Championship test match in Auckland last Saturday when South Africa had a player sin-binned against the All Blacks.
``Three years ago, in the space of five All Black tests, we saw three yellow cards and one red card. On Saturday night, we saw that quantity in a single game - three cards for foul play and one for a professional foul.
``The first yellow card to Bismark Du Plessis was clearly wrong. The second to the same player was clearly correct, as were the cards to Ma’a Nonu and Kieran Read, according to the rules. The problem was that the rules say a second yellow card automatically leads to a red, and so the original error was compounded and South Africa had to play most of the second half one man short, to the detriment of the game.
``Most of the discussion has focused on the error by referee Roman Poite in carding Du Plessis for what was a perfectly legal tackle. This misses the point. Yes, Poite made an error, but errors are inevitable.
``Rugby is played at a furious pace. Split second judgements are required from both players and referees and all of them are going to make mistakes. The rules need to be written with a view that this is going to happen. The two-yellow-equals-a-red rule is simply too draconian to a world where errors of judgement can happen.
Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
``Partly we want to punish individual players for behaving in a reckless way causing unnecessary endangerment to other players. Partly, we want to punish teams for illegal actions of individuals that give their team an advantage.
``For the latter, it is appropriate that the punishment lead to an advantage for the other team in the course of the game being played. For the former, the punishment can occur after the game in the form of suspensions or fines.
``If foul play merits sending a player off, let him be replaced so the game continues to be 15 on 15, but take appropriate action at the post-match judiciary. If the problem is professional fouls, change the incentives so that conceding a penalty does not give the infringing team an advantage in terms of possession and field possession, and instruct referees to be more liberal in awarding penalty tries,’’ Dr Hogan says.
ENDS
Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
a.supporter:hover {background:#EC4438!important;} @media screen and (max-width: 480px) { #byline-block div.byline-block {padding-right:16px;}}
Using Scoop for work?
Scoop is free for personal use, but you’ll need a licence for work use. This is part of our Ethical Paywall and how we fund Scoop. Join today with plans starting from less than $3 per week, plus gain access to exclusive Pro features.
Join Pro Individual Find out more
Find more from University of Canterbury on InfoPages.