Loose Pass: 20-minute card ‘doesn’t feel right’, Newcastle’s big night and a ‘superb tour location’ for the British & Irish Lions
Argentina throw hat into British & Irish Lions tour ring while Newcastle Falcons finally got a Premiership win.
This week we will mostly be concerning ourselves with the 20-minuters, Newcastle’s big night, and future locations for the British & Irish Lions tours…
The 20-minute card decision
“Why do they call them the 20-minuters?”
“Because the average expulsion duration for serious foul play is 20 minutes!”
“Expulsion duration of 20 minutes…!?”
Not since the Experimental Law Variations of 2008 does Loose Pass remember a law trial introduction being so vehemently and polarly debated as the announced introduction of the 20-minute red card last week. Nor, in parts, so misinterpreted, even misrepresented.
Positions were taken quickly. Ireland and France are both opposed to it, although the Irish stance has softened since the small print revealed that permanent reds for more egregious acts were still possible, which is perhaps the most important clause.
The southern hemisphere unions are all for it. Jake White thinks it is a big change that would make a miniscule difference. Ronan O’Gara says he doesn’t see where it fits into the game.
Many think it softens the stance on head contacts, which takes the game a step back from the progressive attitude currently towards head contact and the dangers of permanent head injuries.
But in the background, even that progression in stance has been somewhat stalled, with the law firm currently handling the suit against World Rugby under fire for allegedly pressuring players to ‘come forward’ rather than just listening and courting them. It’s hardly all of them, but if even one case of such were to be proven, it would be damning to the credibility of the others.
What to do? To turn around and say there is not a problem with head injury in rugby would display the sort of wilful ignorance not seen since Donald Trump suggested that injecting disinfectants into bodies would cure you of covid. Yet to continue to focus on eliminating once-off single traumas – as the current head contact protocols generally do – is, frankly, also wilful dismissal of science. Piles of medical evidence shows that it is the repeated minor traumas from perfectly legal tackles and rucks which are the real omnipresent evil. Outlawing the big collisions and head contacts is good PR, but in the end it addresses the symptom more than the problem.
But it has caused a problem to the game itself. We had the Premiership Final and World Cup Final in the past 12 months both affected by red cards for collisions which were tough to actually pin on the tackler directly. Certainly in neither case would you call the contacts egregious or reckless; for a high-profile example of that, look no further than Pablo Matera’s recent red card in the match against South Africa.
Whether the two games were ‘ruined’ is moot; in both cases the teams disadvantaged had quite clear and obvious chances to win. But there’s little doubt that in general, having a player less for half a game is a huge disadvantage. So the choice now is to try to continue the PR drive while lessening that disadvantage.
Which creates a bit of a fudge as the solution. We’re still punishing players by excluding from a game those who might make little more than an error of judgement in a frighteningly fast and fluid situation, even if the team now suffers less.
It does help for clarity that an ultimate red can still be given for the more unpleasant actions, but why require an extra layer of faffing around with substitutes and management for actions not deemed such? Why exclude completely an individual player for something when the sanction/offence is not, in nature, ultimate? Why not just stick with yellows for mistakes, reds for misdemeanours? The 20-minute card doesn’t feel right.
No more weeks of hurt
581 days it was since the corks last popped on a win up at Kingston Park, one of rugby’s longest and least-desired streaks.
That the Falcons have finally won won’t make the speculation over the long-term future go away, nor will it turn around a season in which finishing bottom of the Premiership table could subject the team to relegation.
But considering where the Falcons have been to in those 581 days, credit needs to go to Steve Diamond, whose six-month tenure represents almost certainly one of the toughest challenges within the game currently. Coaches at the top of the table always get the plaudits, but Newcastle are under the tutelage of a born survivor and are beginning to show it.
Lions in Argentina?
The President of Rugby South America has, according to the Daily Mail, issued a formal invitation for the British and Irish Lions to tour Argentina, perhaps as early as 2029.
Why not? Was Pumas head coach Felipe Contepomi’s take, and it should be the take for all concerned at British & Irish Lions HQ. Argentina as a rugby team and location is here to stay.
Runners-up in this year’s Rugby Championship, possessed of a significantly better World Cup record than the current world number ones, producers of many a world class player and with a handy collection of stadia, locations and varied rugby cultures and climates to boost, it’s a superb tour location. And there’s little doubting the Tests would be competitive.
The invitation has been issued. It deserves a response – and if that response is to be negative, we’d love to know why.
READ MORE: 10 of the longest winless streaks in rugby history including a run of 36 straight defeats