[2025 Six Nations] France vs Scotland - 15/3/25

[Leonormous Boozer]

Only really catching up on this. Did the citing mention that it should have been a full red card as it was off the ball and not in the course of playing or anything along those lines?

If not, I think it's a massive error. Refs will continue to shirk responsibility for engagements like this. Once Carley treated is as a tackle and brought in the framework it was only ever going to be an in game yellow.

 

[BrokenWing]

Simple solution is give the bunker the option for the three

 

[Which Tyler]

Simple solution is give the bunker the option for the three

Yeah, it's really weird that the bunker has to be limited to the ref's first thoughts when the whole point is that it doesn't need to go beyond first thoughts.
Refer the incident to the bunker, and let the bunker sort it out.

 

[Saintjay]

Can't a ref just say also check for any foul play?

 

[Reiser99]

Can't a ref just say also check for any foul play?

The issue is that the bunker shouldn't have to because for 'foul play that warrants a straight red' (technically head contact is also foul play) it's either a red or nothing. There is no in between. For head contact there are varying degrees of offence that could be a YC or could be a RC.

The bunker is supposed to save time for head contact where there are lots things to consider, such as impact, amount of force, any mitigation etc... and it wastes time for the ref to do it live.

Say a player punched another player the ref wouldn't say, it meets the YC threshold, I'll send it to the bunker. It would be a clear red and sent off straight away.

WRU probably didn't anticipate that a ref would send a situation where a player has headbutted another player to the bunker because in reality it should just have been a straight red. The mistake was completely Carley's and the bunker was asked to review something it shouldn't have. Why make the game more complicated by asking the bunker to also review if something is worthy of an automatic red.

Let's take for example the incident where Ben Thomas was asked of eye gouging. The ref looked at it live and determined it wasn't an illegal act, just a bit careless with his hands and fingers. Now if the ref had the option to send him to the bunker, he could well have just said I'll yellow card. However, if the bunker says it's not foul play then Wales have lost a player when they shouldn't have.

 

[AlRums]

JFC if we're relying on Dickson to explain things something has gone badly, badly wrong

Dickson was the AR that day, he was on the spot. Why didn't he bring it up then?

 

[AlRums]

Can't a ref just say also check for any foul play?

The tmo should have stated foul play, he can refer that directly to the ref.

How many times have we heard play stopped to check for foul play, originated by the tmo?

 

[AlRums]

Right, Wrong or Theatrical?

Incident during Fr v Sco yesterday. Blue 2 on ground in goal and White 9 gets pushed by Blue 15, falls over Blue 2 and Blue 2 responds to get in face of White 9, now prostrate in goal. Head contact occurs. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/videos/cqlygq419yko Was it foul play? Was it...

rugbyrefs.com

 

[AlRums]

Here's the official announcement from Six Nations

Independent Disciplinary update: Peato Mauvaka (France) - Six Nations Rugby Corporate

France number 2, Peato Mauvaka, appeared before an independent Disciplinary Committee this morning via video link having been cited for an act of foul play contrary to Law 9.12 (A player must not....strike with the head) in the match between France and Scotland on Saturday 15th March 2025

media.sixnationsrugby.com

Attached to that is the commission pdf.

Carley's report is here,

The Yellow Card Report of the Referee considered the incident under Law 9.11 (Players must not do
anything that is reckless or dangerous to others including leading with the elbow or forearm, or jumping into, or over, a tackler.)

The report stated:

"France number 2 who was on the floor was pushed by Scotland 9. France number 15 then pushed Scotland 9 to the ground. France number 2 who was still on the ground and holding Scotland 9's leg then charged Scotland 9. This was off the ball but France number 2 did wrap. The majority of the contact was shoulder to shoulder which resulted in a slight glancing blow to the head of Scotland 9".

Pathetic

 

[BrokenWing]

Wrap. Idiot.

 

[General Melchett]

This was off the ball but France number 2 did wrap. The majority of the contact was shoulder to shoulder which resulted in a slight glancing blow to the head of Scotland 9".

Pathetic

Maybe it was an autocorrect issue while typing his report and Carley overheard Mauvaka busting out a Drake tune.

 

[Reiser99]

Lol, I can just imagine the defence.

"I thought he was going to score and hadn't heard the whistle. I did try to wrap as I tackled him with my head while we were both lying on the floor."

On a serious note, it makes me worried that the citing committee can't tell that it was intentional foul play either. No one involved seems to have said that it was off the ball, after the whistle and intentional. It's a clear attempt to headbutt, regardless of how well he executed it. How you can have multiple stages of review and still come to the wrong conclusion is worrying.

 

[General Melchett]

What the report fails to state is that Ramos' push on White was the main trigger point and that Mauvaka didn't see it and wrongly assumed White purposely fell on him. White and Mauvaka's initial coming together was a nothing incident and happens all the time. Ramos was the main instigator and Mauvaka should have been red carded for deliberate and serious foul play off the ball. Trying to frame it as a tackle is laughable.

Carry on Carley is fortunate that the citing committee have protected him and not exposed his error.

FWIW I don't think Carley should have been reffing that game given the permutations. SH officials should ref the key games in the last round of the comp from now on.