Rugby is in danger of selling its soul to spectators rather than prioritising player welfare.
The “let’s not ruin the game as a spectacle” argument has been, temporarily, accommodated in the law book with trialling of the 20-minute red card – a process that began last year and is in vogue for the Six Nations.
Two incidents in the final round of matches affirmed that the law is indeed an ass at times. World Rugby asserted that “the 20-minute red card was supported following examination of feedback and data from current trials, which demonstrate that tackle culture is changing in the sport with an overall reduction in red cards, and stabilised concussion rates.”
[ Player welfare the prime motivator behind World Rugby’s tackle height trialsOpens in new window ]
Rugby’s governing body quoted a 37 per cent reduction in the number of “tackle school” applications during research carried out over a year and noted that less than 6 per cent had reoffended, presumably over the same period.
World Rugby then claimed that “armed with a clear mandate to design a process that will support rugby’s audience growth mission without compromising on player welfare, the trials will be subject to detailed review and assessment through the prism of welfare and game experience.” That can is still bouncing down the road.
Steve Aboud: the Irishman who saved Italian rugby
At the Stadio Olimpico Italian replacement Ross Vintcent chased a restart and when Hugo Keenan caught the ball inside the Irish 22, hit the Ireland fullback in the face with his head. Referee Luke Pearce brandished a yellow card, which was upgraded on bunker review to a 20-minute red card. This enables the offender to be replaced after the allotted time.
Vintcent ran 35m with an unencumbered view of his target, stood upright in contact, wasn’t bamboozled by a late change of direction or dip in height and hit with force. In the old days, it was a stonewall red card.
The World Rugby-sanctioned trial approves that any act of foul play which is deemed not deliberate or intentional will now see the player punished with a 20-minute red card rather than the permanent sending-off. It was a clause that allowed Pearce to throw it over to the bunker.
Is brain damage accrued from a technical offence rather than blatant foul play less severe? The answer to that question might head rugby’s way sooner rather than later. There is no suggestion that Vintcent, who apologised to Keenan on his way off the pitch after being carded, set out to deliberately injure his opponent but that’s not the issue, so trying to ascribe intent is a fool’s errand.
Later that night was a more egregious piece of officiating in France’s Six Nations winning victory over Scotland. French hooker Peato Mauvaka launched what can be described as a flying headbutt that contacted Scottish scrumhalf Ben White. The ball was in the hands of French fullback Thomas Ramos at the time.
Mauvaka’s wasn’t a legitimate act; some might even consider what he did reprehensible. Referee Matthew Carley and his band of officials came up with a ruling that saw the hooker receive a yellow card because the TMO, Marius van der Westhuizen, judged there not to have been a high degree of danger.
What about the fact that he is attempting nothing permissible on a rugby pitch? It should have been a straight red card. Player welfare in these instances just sounds like a catchphrase. It’s not just Mauvaka who should have a case to answer after the weekend.
