Nigel Owens’ suggestion that deals with red cards after 20 minutes and could finally end the debate: Planet Rugby

Nigel Owens hopes the idea of ​​a 20-minute red card will finally be relegated to the dustbin after French rugby spoke out about the court case earlier this week.

Southern Hemisphere teams have tried hard to promote this idea, believing that dismissals for “accidental” head contact constitute unfair punishment.

It has been used in both the Rugby Championship and Super Rugby, with Australia and New Zealand being big fans of the law.

However, critics claim this could jeopardize player safety, with the majority of people in the northern hemisphere opposing the proposal.

“It’s that simple”

“As for the 20-minute red card idea, I’m not a fan. As (former Test referee) Mathieu (Raynal) said, I don’t think it really solves any of the problems we have in the game at the moment will,” Owens wrote in his comment WalesOnline Split.

“If someone has committed a red card offense on the pitch, they should be given a red card, which will suspend them for the rest of the game. “It’s as simple as that.”

Owens wrote after the French Rugby Federation (FFR) presented a series of legislative change proposals that it wanted to submit to World Rugby.

The agenda focused on speeding up the game, including introducing shot clocks at scrums, granting time-outs for conversions and reducing the number of substitutes.

The FFR also confirmed that its stance on 20-minute red cards remains unchanged despite continued pressure from the southern hemisphere.

Owens agrees with France’s view but suggests changing the law to prevent players being sent off for “random” incidents.

So this could appease the southern hemisphere giants and finally end the controversial law.

“Again, more attention needs to be paid to the real issues that led us to the discussion about the 20-minute red card,” the former Test referee wrote.

“The experiment arose from players being ‘severely’ sent off for offenses that, according to the law, were worthy of a red card.

“What needs to be addressed is to ensure that a sending off is clearly a sending off and cannot be seen as ‘harsh’ or ‘unfortunate’ but rather as an act of violence or complete recklessness.” That’s how it used to be and that’s how it should always be.

“The problem at the moment is that players are being sent off for accidental head collisions which are not robberies or recklessness, but simply rugby collisions gone wrong by mistake.

“They shouldn’t be considered red card offenses at all – do we need to change the laws instead?” I think so.”

SANZAAR gives the green light to controversial 20-minute red card with a twist for the 2024 Rugby Championship

Rugby Championship

The 20-minute red card was used in the last Rugby Championship, but with the condition that deliberate actions with a high level of danger would result in it being removed for the remainder of the game.

There was only one red card in the tournament, in the second half of the final when Pablo Matera was sent off for Argentina against South Africa.

“I am against the 20-minute red card because if you have been sent off you have done something reckless that has put another player in great danger or you have committed an act of violence. “A red card means you deserve to be off the pitch, so I don’t see why there should be a middle ground,” Owens added.

“In my opinion, a 20-minute red card is an excuse. It’s just a matter of covering up the gaps, while the discussion that really needs to be had is to define exactly what constitutes a red card offense and what doesn’t. That would be far more constructive for the game of rugby.

“Furthermore, we did not see any real changes in player behavior during testing this summer, including at the Rugby Championship. There’s still a lot of careless and reckless behavior out there, so I don’t know if the introduction of these new cards has made much of a difference at all.”

READ MORE: SAZAAR’s 20-minute red card claims ‘unfounded’ as French rugby backs ‘permanent ban’