The Springbok debate: Has World Rugby gone mad with red card decisions?
World Rugby’s controversial red card decision against Franco Mostert (pictured) in the Springboks’ match against Italy highlights the need for a more nuanced interpretation of Law 9.11 and 9.30 to ensure fair and consistent officiating. Picture: Michael Bradley / AFP
Image: Michael Bradley / AFP
It was another weekend of controversy as the Springboks were again reduced to 14 men during their Test match against Italy; this time a 32-14 win was secured without the services of Franco Mostert after the lock was sent off in just the 12th minute of the match.
World Rugby Law 9.11 states: “Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others. This is a general rule that covers actions like leading with the elbow or forearm, jumping into or over a tackler, and any other dangerous play that isn't specifically covered by other laws. Sanctions can range from penalties to yellow or red cards, depending on the severity of the incident and its potential to cause injury.”
It goes into more detail about intent, and that wrapping the tackler’s arm is of critical importance.
Like Lood de Jager a week prior against France, the Mostert incident was debatable at best and extremely controversial at worst.
World Rugby’s Red Card Law 9.30: Mostert Incident and Harsh Interpretation
World Rugby has two applications of the red card sending off offence under Law 9.30. One is that a player is sent off for 20 minutes, and for more serious offences for intentional and highly dangerous actions the player cannot be replaced; for all other actions the player can be replaced after 20 minutes.
In the Mostert incident, he tackled Italian flyhalf Paolo Garbisi. However, Springbok centre Ethan Hooker actually got to Gabrisi first around the waist. Mostert was in a low position and made contact with his right shoulder before he could wrap his arm, but crucially the contact was made below shoulder height of the opposition player.
Referee James Doleman was told by the French TMO that there was clear head contact, even though replays suggested it was more shoulder to shoulder contact.
Therefore, Mostert was sent off for the rest of the game for shoulder-to-shoulder contact. Shoulder-to-shoulder contact should always be up for review and technically should not warrant a permanent red card punishment under the World Rugby laws. This also allows for further scrutiny of the decision so that a more informed approach is taken.
The fact that Mostert’s decision wasn’t even considered for a review is in itself ridiculous and an incredibly harsh interpretation and application of the law.
* The views expressed are not necessarily the views of IOL or Independent Media.
** JOIN THE CONVERSATION: Send us an email with your comments, thoughts or responses to iolletters@inl.co.za. Letters should be a maximum of 500 words, and may be edited for length. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Submissions should include a contact number and physical address (not for publication).