Gloucester v Saracens

[didds]

They make it up as they go along anyway.

 

[SimonSmith]

Don't forget the one week off he'll get for "Intensive Coaching" or whatever they call it to reduce the number of weeks off.

 

[Jarrod Burton]

Good news that OF has been cited. Any bets on what he'll get - six weeks with four suspended?

four with three suspended, given theres only one round until the 6N

 

[Volun-selected]

four with three suspended, given theres only one round until the 6N

If he hasn’t been officially named for the 6N squad he may “just” get banned from club matches - I seem to recall that happened recently. Sucks for sarries but will keep the blazers and the revenue stream happy.

 

[Phil E]

I am sure I read last night that he has now been cited for two incidents in that game!

 

[DocP]

In this match I saw a rolling maul going over for a disallowed try, I think by Gloucester, where an attacking player was clearly collapsing on the side of the maul which effectively drew out 2 defending players and left a clear pathway for the maul to go over the line pretty much unhindered. I'll try and find a clip somewhere but so far no luck (it may have been another game from the weekend)
How do people feel about this if the try was rewarded? It was disallowed for something else, held up or knock on I think. We always see the defence pinged for collapsing but never the attack and this was clearly a ploy to clear a path for the maul by removing defenders who were trying desperately not to collapse and give away a PT

 

[Phil E]

We always see the defence pinged for collapsing but never the attack and this was clearly a ploy to clear a path for the maul by removing defenders who were trying desperately not to collapse and give away a PT

The ball carrier is the only person in a maul who can legally go to ground.
The law states that "All other players in a maul must endeavour to stay on their feet."

I have penalised attacking players for dragging a maul down at the front and causing a collapse of the whole thing. It's dangerous if nothing else.

 

[DocP]

That was exactly my thinking. I'll keep my eye out for the clip and also to see if any referees pick it up going forward.

I did notice KD pinging a BC for sliding back in a maul. The first time I have seen this picked up in a long while even though it goes on all the time.

 

[BikingBud]

What chance?

Monye expects Farrell to be clear for Six Nations

It will be "staggering" if England captain Owen Farrell is banned for the start of the Six Nations, says ex-international Ugo Monye.

www.bbc.co.uk

But when players are not bothered about their own safety

 

[belladonna]

Buwahahaha

England captain Farrell set to play in Six Nations

England's Owen Farrell is set to be available for their Six Nations opener with Scotland despite a four-week ban.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Volun-selected]

Don't forget the one week off he'll get for "Intensive Coaching" or whatever they call it to reduce the number of weeks off.

As you suspected, he’s signed up for the “coaching intervention programme” so we can all look forward to the new and improved OF showcasing an exemplary tackle technique over the 6N campaign.

 

[crossref]

As you suspected, he’s signed up for the “coaching intervention programme” so we can all look forward to the new and improved OF showcasing an exemplary tackle technique over the 6N campaign.

I don't think he will necessarily complete the course before he plays again

 

[crossref]

There it's more drama to come because the squad named miss the last round of the premiership. So if he is named in the squad then Saracens game with Bristol will no longer be a meaningful fixture for him and his ban will have to be extended by a week.

So if he is named in the squad he can't play against Scotland , but if he is not named in the squad then he will be free to play

Borthwick will omit him from the squad I think, then draft him in afterwards

 

[didds]

Borthwick will omit him from the squad I think, then draft him in afterwards

Probably. The system permits this scenario to be gamed, so it will likely be.
thats not excusing anybody, or sayoing its ethical, but if the PTB dont want this situation to be gamed they need to change the rules that permit it.

*shrug*

 

[Jarrod Burton]

Three Weeks down from Four. Bit of a joke frankly.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/r...udicial-isnt-fit-purpose-needs-reforming.html

 

[SimonSmith]

Not really our job as referees, but as stakeholders, that ugly word, in the game, we can admit that Regulation 17, at the Elite level, isn't fit for purpose, especially when it comes to mitigating factors.

Your standard Elite player turns up. Sits down. Doesn't swear. Says "guily". Says "I'm really sorry, and I'll try really hard not to do it again". Says "I'll undertake intensive coaching".

And despite there being video evidence clearly showing culpability - bang to rights, every jury would find him guilty - our Elite chum gets maximum discount, which will end up meaning a sanction of under 50%.

It seems clear that when a Discplinary Panel has a chance to send a signal about an offence that is an issue across the game - an explicit power in Regulation 17 - they have, once again, sent a soft signal.

Let's stop pretending that discipline is about actual discipline, or about player safety. It's about getting the product back out on the field as quickly as possible under the wrapping paper of "Look how seriously we're taking this". Coaching? What the fuck is he spending his time doing? The Times fucking crossword? How long has he been playing rugby? The need to not take heads off isn't new; this isn't the first time he's done this.

Maybe, if a player gets a week off his sanction for a week's coaching the corollary is that the appropriate coach at his club is suspended for doing such a shit job.

 

[Dickie E]

I remember, many years ago, red carding a player who had representative duties coming up. The powers that be were quite interested to know if I really thought it was a red card, or maybe, just maybe, I had over-reacted. Red card stood

 

[didds]

Three Weeks down from Four. Bit of a joke frankly.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/r...udicial-isnt-fit-purpose-needs-reforming.html

Saw this posted elsewhere, which i'll agree with - unless anyone can actually show its factually incorrect of course

A couple of points on Owen Farrell’s hearing. - The outcome and process followed is in keeping with other offences we’ve seen. - He cant/shouldn’t be treated differently just because of his standing with England/you don’t like him.
Now you may disagree with the outcome and that’s absolutely fine, but then your issue is with how everyone is treated not how OF has been treated. And there I would not argue, I don’t think good behaviour at a hearing etc… should count but that’s a generic issues not OFs.

And I think thats pretty much in line with what Simon said above.

 

[Phil E]

I remember, many years ago, red carding a player who had representative duties coming up. The powers that be were quite interested to know if I really thought it was a red card, or maybe, just maybe, I had over-reacted. Red card stood

I once red carded a colt who had an England trial the next weekend.
Club, coaches, parents all tried to persuade me not to red card him because it would hurt his career.

They didn't seem too bothered about the career of the lad he upended and dropped straight onto his head!

 

[shebeen]

Three Weeks down from Four. Bit of a joke frankly.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/r...udicial-isnt-fit-purpose-needs-reforming.html

It really is amazing Owen Farrell has not been carded/cited more in the past. He has on numerous occasions had illegal tackles ignored somehow.

Here's a high profile one springing to mind immediately. I believe the referee deemed it to have enough of a wrap to be considered a tackle.