Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
What changes with Eddie Jones
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Manx" data-source="post: 775812" data-attributes="member: 50236"><p>Not looking for an argument and can see your point! I believe the enforcement of the system is wrong where the foul (holding down) is not penalized!</p><p></p><p>From what I have seen, in the majority of such cases, a penalty is given for the original foul play BUT the retaliator is then penalized by having the original penalty reversed!</p><p></p><p>Holding down is not of itself a foul deserving a yellow other than where persistent (individually or team wise). </p><p></p><p>The retribution probably is because there is normally a level of violence and, depending on the level of such violence, what is the outcome ranging from just reverse penalty, yellow or a red card.. </p><p></p><p>Should the original fouler be treated differently because it provoked the retaliation? I suppose that comes down to interpretation rather than the system. Have seen many cases where red has been given for the retaliation and yellow for the original provocation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Manx, post: 775812, member: 50236"] Not looking for an argument and can see your point! I believe the enforcement of the system is wrong where the foul (holding down) is not penalized! From what I have seen, in the majority of such cases, a penalty is given for the original foul play BUT the retaliator is then penalized by having the original penalty reversed! Holding down is not of itself a foul deserving a yellow other than where persistent (individually or team wise). The retribution probably is because there is normally a level of violence and, depending on the level of such violence, what is the outcome ranging from just reverse penalty, yellow or a red card.. Should the original fouler be treated differently because it provoked the retaliation? I suppose that comes down to interpretation rather than the system. Have seen many cases where red has been given for the retaliation and yellow for the original provocation. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
What changes with Eddie Jones
Top