Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

The first red card of the Super Rugby season sparks heated online debate

By Josh Raisey
Brodie Rettalick

The Highlanders sealed a memorable comeback win against the Chiefs in the opening game of the 2019 Super Rugby season today.

ADVERTISEMENT

The game had a lot of action, but the main talking point after the game has been Sio Tomkinson’s red card with 15 minutes remaining, something in which the fans are divided on.

On one hand, a lot of fans are saying that it should have been a red, given the fact that there were no arms and it was to Brodie Retallick’s head. The fans are saying that ones similar to this have been punished in the past, and in modern laws that is a fair call.
https://twitter.com/Lee3069Jones/status/1096321101234429953
https://twitter.com/BrashMark/status/1096327829619322880
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1096321168301158400
https://twitter.com/timoconnorbl/status/1096333106599116800
https://twitter.com/jtindahouse/status/1096320534529204225
https://twitter.com/jandcleaver/status/1096321064987029505
https://twitter.com/JamieShaw7/status/1096326258357501952

However, these issues are never black and white and there is always a lot of contention. A huge number of fans are saying that Retallick ducked into the tackle and caught Tomkinson out.

Some fans are claiming that it was only a yellow card, and some are even claiming that Retallick should have been punished for a head charge. This just goes to show how one incident can have such alarmingly different opinions in rugby.

These fans believe that it was a harsh call:
https://twitter.com/chivers1989/status/1096320586182262784
https://twitter.com/RugbySheep/status/1096321643993944064
https://twitter.com/Lee3069Jones/status/1096321101234429953
https://twitter.com/JDSportsMgmt/status/1096320687243812865
https://twitter.com/Scotti5h/status/1096320711793225728
https://twitter.com/Scotti5h/status/1096320711793225728
https://twitter.com/JHodge1203/status/1096321213121449984

Some fans have tried to be a bit more diplomatic about the matter, saying that it is a red to the letter of the law, but is a tough one to officiate. Meanwhile, some fans have also highlighted the inconsistencies in refereeing currently, as there are certainly players that have got away with similar or worse offences.
https://twitter.com/FindingCotton/status/1096375203817496577
https://twitter.com/jgemmell10/status/1096338309691912192
https://twitter.com/Jack_Clayton_7/status/1096365930437926912

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

LIVE NOW - Singapore SVNS Day 1

Fresh Starts | Episode 3 | Cobus Reinach

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 11

Chasing The Sun | Series 1 Episode 1

The Breakfast Show | Episode 7

Abbie Ward: A Bump in the Road

Pacific Four Series 2024 | Canada vs USA

Japan Rugby League One | Verblitz v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
Jon 10 hours ago
The case for keeping the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby Pacific

I have heard it asked if RA is essentially one of the part owners and I suppose therefor should be on the other side of these two parties. If they purchased the rebels and guaranteed them, and are responsible enough they incur Rebels penalties, where is this line drawn? Seems rough to have to pay a penalty for something were your involvement sees you on the side of the conned party, the creditors. If the Rebels directors themselves have given the club their money, 6mil worth right, why aren’t they also listed as sitting with RA and the Tax office? And the legal threat was either way, new Rebels or defunct, I can’t see how RA assume the threat was less likely enough to warrant comment about it in this article. Surely RA ignore that and only worry about whether they can defend it or not, which they have reported as being comfortable with. So in effect wouldn’t it be more accurate to say there is no further legal threat (or worry) in denying the deal. Unless the directors have reneged on that. > Returns of a Japanese team or even Argentinean side, the Jaguares, were said to be on the cards, as were the ideas of standing up brand new teams in Hawaii or even Los Angeles – crazy ideas that seemingly forgot the time zone issues often cited as a turn-off for viewers when the competition contained teams from South Africa. Those timezones are great for SR and are what will probably be needed to unlock its future (cant see it remaining without _atleast _help from Aus), day games here are night games on the West Coast of america, were potential viewers triple, win win. With one of the best and easiest ways to unlock that being to play games or a host a team there. Less good the further across Aus you get though. Jaguares wouldn’t be the same Jaguares, but I still would think it’s better having them than keeping the Rebels. The other options aren’t really realistic 25’ options, no. From reading this authors last article I think if the new board can get the investment they seem to be confident in, you keeping them simply for the amount of money they’ll be investing in the game. Then ditch them later if they’re not good enough without such a high budget. Use them to get Jaguares reintergration stronger, with more key players on board, and have success drive success.

24 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Ex-Ireland wing brands Six Nations champs 'not that good an Irish side' Ex-Ireland wing brands Six Nations champs 'not that good'
Search