Red and yellow cards

Late to the party in the SA Aus game but at about 17 min Dyantyi has wiped out le Roux accidentally with le roux at best landing on his shoulders. No pen no cards as it's 'green on green'.

If world rugby have brought in the rule to ensure that player safety is paramount why should it matter if you wipe out your own team mate or opponent. If we're saying intention isn't paramount surely Dyantyi should have seen yellow?

try reading the laws

Thanks for your limited input.

Cos he wasn’t an opponent therefore even when accidental he wouldn’t have been challenging the player on his own team. Whereas when it’s an opponent in that situation, while the thing that caused injury might be accidental it was still in the act of challenging the opponent that caused the injury.

Plus, apart from sanctioning a player a yellow or red is meant to hand the opposition an advantage for 10 mins or the remainder of the game. Would hardly seem right handing the opposition an advantage over the team who was infringed against.

Cheers oracle for the rounder reply. I'm aware of the laws and why he couldn't be sanctioned. My aim and mention of wr is to highlight this law is meant to be all about player safety and not intent. Why then should it matter if it's an opponent you're endangering or your team mate. It's to open a discussion on whether that's the correct way to look at.
It reminds me in football when for Newcastle United dyer and bowyer got into a fist fight in the middle of the match. Both newcastle players (hilarious for me as a boro fan) both red carded.

Fighting your team mate, yes I agree with red cards. Bringing the game into disrepute or whatever. Fun to watch but need to be sanctioned. Accidental stuff to your own team mate though - no, it’s not a card for me.

It’s dufficult to put into words but what I was trying to get across is that, in my opinion, the difference between an opponent causing injury and a team mate is one of challenging (as part of the game) vs support. While the opponent is always challenging and might cause injury or danger accidentally, it is always while challenging (be it a tackle, jumping for the ball, etc.) so they need to do the challenging with a duty of care for the opponent. However, a team mate is only ever going to be going about their game in support of the team mate so I can’t see that that an accident in support of a team mate could ever be sanctioned when they’re not challenging the injured player. If that makes sense? Otherwise we’d have a helluva mess with players being carded e.g. for a clearance kick that slices off the boot and hits your team mate in the face! That would be a farce.

Makes perfect sense yes. The point I get stick on though is the reckless nature of challenges. And being in a realistic position to challenge. It's all designed to protect players and make sure people are aware of their surroundings. Dyantyi had no idea idea he had the potential to seriously hurt his full back. No idea he was there. If he was wearing yellow he'd have had a card. I'm not sure that's fair: one way or another!

Maybe reckless play against your own player should be something that is looked at after the game, rather than carded during. If a player has seriously hurt his own man then I wouldn’t be against a retrospective red and a ban, for example.

Could see that working. Shores up a gap.