Why are the IRB and the refs dead set on making Rugby Union less physical?

It's all open to the refs interpretation.

If as you say it was a dump tackle and you didn't drop him on his head/shoulders/etc. Then it shouldn't have been a card.

They're clamping down on spear tackles which in some cases leads dump tackles to be mistaken as spear tackles.

I do agree with the physical aspect though. People complain that it's become too slow and boring. Look at the 80s, while players mightn't have been as skillful as players today for the most part (there are obviously exceptions) it was faster. Why? Rucking.

Look at the old rucks, if someone was in the way you shoed them out of it, not stamping just moving him out of the way. If you've got an 18 stone prop ready to rake your back, you'll be less inclined to stay in the way and slow the ball down.

Now though, players can lie down and put their arms up and slowly wriggle away slowing it down by a couple of seconds.

Rugby is coming up to a cross roads over the next few years and I fear that the game will change. Players are getting bigger and bigger, and hitting each other with the intensity of a small car crash many times in a game. Amateur level is one thing, but at international level, the commitment borders on the insane, when a player will literally lay this body on the line for the pride of his country. Take the second Lions game (British and Irish Lions versus South Africa) this summer as an example. Six players had to go to hospital after the game, two undergoing surgery for a fractured cheekbone and a dislocated shoulder. There was also a player sent off for eye gouging.

The fact is players get seriously injured and even die on the rugby pitch. Referees these days are very strict on spear tackles, high tackles, tackling in the air, stamping, eye-gouging, biting and testicle pulling. It's a game played on the edge of brutality, and there has to be rules, or we'd be scumbags, like soccer players.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/829794...