England vs Wales - 12/08/23

[Rugbyfan564]

'However, a disciplinary panel reviewing the incident cited a change in dynamic in the contact area as a mitigation.

The panel said the involvement of England's Jamie George in the tackle caused Basham to change direction.

The independent judicial committee said: "After reviewing all the evidence, questioning the player in detail and hearing submissions from the player's representative, the committee concluded that the foul play review officer was wrong, on the balance of probabilities, to upgrade the yellow card issued to the player to a red card."

 

[Rugbyfan564]

Farrell and Sexton most likely the MPV's of rugby to these people.

In the world cup, players will be receiving more red cards for much less dangerous tackles.

To be fair Rugby is dying and needs the big names to bring in viewers.

 

[Grizwald]

Can't believe Farrell has got off with it, RFU lawyers must be awesome.

Seems Jamie George's contact changed the players height, what a load of tosh (as an English fan).

 

[Rugbyfan564]

As a rugbymad Irishman living in England, nobody that I spoke with since Sunday thought it was anything other than a red card. It was even suggested that the ref had bottled it by sending it for review. This shows how weak the commitment to player welfare really is. I can only assume that World Rugby are terrified that if England fails to get out of the group, viewing figures and future potential revenue will be affected….. I despair.

They probably right. Ratings even for England matches won't be that high (No where near 2015) and the times zone means it's only England, France and South Africa with high populations watching in peak time.

 

[MattGaff]

Silly to say that as even if you take Jamie George out of the equation, he is still going high and leading with the shoulder!

 

[RedruthRFC]

Not from him, from World Rugby saying "No, no, take a look at that again" or from another union. I recall once before World Rugby stepping in after a decision was made, but I can't recall the case/situation.

WR appointed the panel didn't they? I could see the WRU having a right of appeal as one of their players was the wronged party, allowing any old union the right of appeal would create a bureaucratic nightmare of angle shooting.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Silly to say that as even if you take Jamie George out of the equation, he is still going high and leading with the shoulder!

Yep. They're seemingly hanging it on George causing a change of direction but he barely touched the ball carrier.

Shocking decision.

The key to me is Farrell's reaction. He didn't bother arguing, he knew exactly what he'd done.

 

[Rugbyfan564]

WR appointed the panel didn't they? I could see the WRU having a right of appeal as one of their players was the wronged party, allowing any old union the right of appeal would create a bureaucratic nightmare of angle shooting.

Telegraph say World Rugby have the right to appeal.

 

[ncurd]

Maybe the Aussies have played a blinder by keeping Farrell in the team????

In all seriousness, the most farcical decision I've ever seen come out of this sport. Absolute joke today. Disgraceful

I think the infamous O'Driscoll's Lions tour one was far far worse but I don't think I've seen anything this bad since.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Obv only one angle but I can't see that JG intervention being particularly relevant at all tbh,
Like sure there's a change in direction but there's no drop in height and there's no bend in the waist from Farrell

 

[Reiser99]

Just watched it again and it's the most minimal change in height and direction. Really clutching at straws.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Farrell is fully upright and makes head contact. Even if there was mitigation, and there isn't, I don't think it should apply when the technique is as reckless as it is here.

Massive own goal by WR, no one was debating the card.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

The only way they could possibly justify it being a yellow instead of red was if they said there was the change in direction combined with it being an absorbing tackle rather than a dominant one - but that's a massive reach and they didn't even take into account force (or mention no bend at the waist from Farrell, so it was always an illegal shot regardless)

I mentioned in another thread that there'd be some weird decisions from SR affiliated officials, I can't see a NH citing panel coming to this decision/ignoring the directives that they look at so strongly this season in the Prem/Europe

 

[General Melchett]

Can just imagine the headlines tomorrow - "England's Rugby World Cup hopes were dealt a huge blow when Owen Farrell's red card was overturned".

Sad state of affairs when the showcasing of WR's pride and joy trumps player safety.

 

[higgik]

Farrell is fully upright and makes head contact. Even if there was mitigation, and there isn't, I don't think it should apply when the technique is as reckless as it is here.

Massive own goal by WR, no one was debating the card.

Dont understand the mitigation.
There maybe a change of direction, but there was no change in height, so in fact if he hadnt of changed direction the tackle would have still been head height, but even more dominant.

If Steward got banned for a tackle where he was obviously defending himself and the player was falling, then this is far more serious.

There is definitely something wrong with OF and his attitude.
When he is relaxed he plays far more fluidly, when he tries to be aggressive he cannot control anything.

 

[Saintjay]

The rest of us lower league plebs must learn to tackle below the sternum and be grateful.

 

[saulan]

The only way they could possibly justify it being a yellow instead of red was if they said there was the change in direction combined with it being an absorbing tackle rather than a dominant one - but that's a massive reach and they didn't even take into account force (or mention no bend at the waist from Farrell, so it was always an illegal shot regardless)

I mentioned in another thread that there'd be some weird decisions from SR affiliated officials, I can't see a NH citing panel coming to this decision/ignoring the directives that they look at so strongly this season in the Prem/Europe

I was about to say the same thing, I pulled you all into a discussion last year, seems it has come to roost (March 2022). I got the timing wrong of when it may be an issue internationally, but it does seem to have happened.

Super Rugby Pacific (2022)

Congratulations Drua! :D https://super.rugby/superrugby/news/drua-notch-historic-super-win-over-rebels/

www.therugbyforum.com

Yea this is exactly the one I mean. In URC and NH rugby from what I've been seeing, any head to head clash is being seen as the defender not putting in enough effort to get low and potentially cause injury. Pretty sure the first contact there ends up being head on head and that the player didn't make it back to the field/failed HIA and there was some significant force going into it. But from what your saying it seems the aspect of the game is just being reffed very differently.

Although, maybe it's just me. Interested in what the thoughts are from others in SA and from the NH leagues and SA in terms of this kind of clash as I do feel this could rear its head in Autumn Internationals, if currently being reffed inconsistently.
@TRF_stormer2010 @unrated @TRF_Olyy @LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan) @mdaclarke @Groundhog

 

[RedruthRFC]

Makes a complete mockery of them and whole bunker system first time it's used.

The panel would have been aware that their decision is throwing the whole new process as well as the person responsible under the bus, so in a sense, it is nice to see them go with the decision that they believed was correct, rather than toeing the party line.

Quite how they reached the decision though is beyond me. They only conclusion I can draw is that from now on, if you have the right representation, they will almost always get a red card overturned.

The can of worms that it opens is frightening. If, as is being asserted, the decision took a long time to reach and was influenced by Farrell and his council, how are referees or even review officers ever meant to be confident that they're making the correct decision? I don't profess how to do it, but WR have to come up with a set of laws that referees can understand and apply without ambiguity or inconsistency.

 

[Saintjay]

Prof John Fairclough of Progressive Rugby said:

"Today's astounding decision to overturn the given to Owen Farrell for his tackle on Taine Basham has made a mockery of World Rugby's claim that player welfare is the game's number one priority.

 

[ShropshireAllBlack]

I suppose there is no possibility that the head of the referees (Joel Jutge?) will be having a word with the powers that be? No official can implement the head contact protocol now with any level of confidence.
I will bet that the officials' review last Monday didn't question the red card.