RugbyRebels

Ah well, I am old, out of date and not the brightest but I think that provocation at that level should be able to be answered with a good smack in the mouth legitimately. Any referee that does not issue a yellow for that degree of provocation the way the laws are now applied is not fit to hold a whistle. It should be one or the other: allow a provoked player reasonable retaliation or discipline the provoker. Effectively, the referee was an accomplice.

Oakboy wrote:Ah well, I am old, out of date and not the brightest but I think that provocation at that level should be able to be answered with a good smack in the mouth legitimately. Any referee that does not issue a yellow for that degree of provocation the way the laws are now applied is not fit to hold a whistle. It should be one or the other: allow a provoked player reasonable retaliation or discipline the provoker. Effectively, the referee was an accomplice.

I don't think you can go with the licence for violence anymore. The world has moved on.
It's certainly not cardable.
However, it absolutely should be a reversed decision - they'll soon stop doing it if they're throwing away their earned rewards and gifting them to their opponent.

Which Tyler wrote:

Oakboy wrote:Ah well, I am old, out of date and not the brightest but I think that provocation at that level should be able to be answered with a good smack in the mouth legitimately. Any referee that does not issue a yellow for that degree of provocation the way the laws are now applied is not fit to hold a whistle. It should be one or the other: allow a provoked player reasonable retaliation or discipline the provoker. Effectively, the referee was an accomplice.

I don't think you can go with the licence for violence anymore. The world has moved on.
It's certainly not cardable.
However, it absolutely should be a reversed decision - they'll soon stop doing it if they're throwing away their earned rewards and gifting them to their opponent.

As soon as he got away he was telling the aussies to scrum again. End result is they do, and we won the free kick. He had a few words with either the hooker or loosehead and walked away .

Which Tyler wrote: I don't think you can go with the licence for violence anymore. The world has moved on.
It's certainly not cardable.
However, it absolutely should be a reversed decision - they'll soon stop doing it if they're throwing away their earned rewards and gifting them to their opponent.

There is more than enough in here to make it a penalty

https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=9

Not enough in there for a card. The games a bit to professional now for slap round the ear, probably for the best but part of me misses a self regulated forwards game.

Yeah, think Graham Henry was saying something similar before the tournament. All this celebrating in an opponent's face, head slapping/rubbing and general gloating is a terrible look and should be penalised.

I am not normally as fan of "role model" arguments but in this case it is fair. If all international teams do it why can't lower down and kids' ones?

I am also not a massive fan of all the backs piling in to celebrate a good scrum. Fair enough if it is genuine excitement at a big moment but when it is every time and whooping it just looks pathetic