Gloucester v Saracens

[shebeen]

So I guess Owen Farrell didn't learn much at that "tackle clinic" after all.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1690427331708665856

He's been doing it his entire career, so the only surprise is that he's finally being penalised for dangerous tackles.

 

[Dickie E]

So I guess Owen Farrell didn't learn much at that "tackle clinic" after all.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1690427331708665856

He's been doing it his entire career, so the only surprise is that he's finally being penalised for dangerous tackles.

Implications for WC?

 

[Decorily]

In fairness there is probably some mitigation in the fact that the red player was falling towards the tackler.

 

[BikingBud]

In fairness there is probably some mitigation in the fact that the red player was falling towards the tackler.

Oh dear is that the start of the white wash

He has previous, long standing previous.

He has not learnt despite having been given much leeway and over sympathetic consideration, despite all the allowances that have been made for his "total commitment" he continues to flout the law.

The answer has to be a significant ban, else the already weak and farcical disciplinary process, (see Sexton) is further undermined.

 

[Decorily]

Oh dear is that the start of the white wash

He has previous, long standing previous.

He has not learnt despite having been given much leeway and over sympathetic consideration, despite all the allowances that have been made for his "total commitment" he continues to flout the law.

The answer has to be a significant ban, else the already weak and farcical disciplinary process, (see Sexton) is further undermined.

No whitewash from me...not talking about his previous.

 

[belladonna]

[Replying to shebeen]

Well, quite. He's a serial head-high-shoulder-charger, IMHO.

Not sure I'd totally agree with "finally", though. He got 5 games for a dangerous tackle on Charlie Atkinson in 2020, 4 games (reduced to 3) in Jan this year for a dangerous tackle on Jack Clement, and red carded yesterday, presumably soon to be suspended.

What's a mystery though us why the punishments don't appear to be getting longer. Perhaps tbf the Jan one this year wasn't at particularly high speed. Yesterday's was pretty much at full tilt so I'd expect a far stiffer penalty, especially as it's an almost identical repeat so soon after the previous one.

Video compilation of OF's tackle technique below.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1614222984142528516

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Player falling or not, the arm is never moving into a tackle position. It is always going to be a charge.

Prediction 2 (frre for the first RWC game) or 3 match ban (missing 1 RWC game). "Previous good conduct" / tidy biscuits brought to, and a nice suit at the hearing" .

 

[BikingBud]

No whitewash from me...not talking about his previous.

But that is exactly what needs to be discussed.

If the first thing that comes up in peoples mind is mitigation then how does the GAME demonstrate that player safety is absolutely none negotiable. Treat the symptom, ban the offenders though meaningful restrictions and move forward.

No player is above that

Oh sorry my mistake. There are a number of players that have been allowed to continue playing in this manner for a long period with myriad excuses.

 

[Decorily]

But that is exactly what needs to be discussed.

If the first thing that comes up in peoples mind is mitigation then how does the GAME demonstrate that player safety is absolutely none negotiable. Treat the symptom, ban the offenders though meaningful restrictions and move forward.

No player is above that

Oh sorry my mistake. There are a number of players that have been allowed to continue playing in this manner for a long period with myriad excuses.

As referees aren't we asked to look for mitigation when going through the process!

 

[BikingBud]

As referees aren't we asked to look for mitigation when going through the process!

So obviously from the first view, didn't need the off field, less pressure, bunker overview to decide that there was no mitigation.

Process was done and dusted -

We all know that and the repetitive point for consideration is his complete lack of ownership of his dangerous technique. If he doesn't know it is dangerous then the education programme was ineffective and an extended further remedial training period is entirely appropriate.

 

[Decorily]

We all know that and the repetitive point for consideration is his complete lack of ownership of his dangerous technique. If he doesn't know it is dangerous then the education programme was ineffective and an extended further remedial training period is entirely appappropriate

Not something that is up for consideration by the referee

 

[BikingBud]

Not something that is up for consideration by the referee

Never said it was.

However, we appear to be discussing different things here. Although with such limited response it is not clear.

If you feel it wasn't a red then please provide your thoughts.

The match day officials felt it was so we should go forward and consider the disciplinary process and the actions required to ensure player safety, they must take into account the significant aggravating factors and previous history. If you feel differently then it would be good to hear your thoughts.

 

[Decorily]

My only point is that as a referee I feel that there could be mitigation in the fact that the ball carrier appeared to be falling as a result of the prior collision/tackle attempt. I'm certainly not condoning OF's past record etc. It could be argued that he was not in fact attempting a tackle but rather attempting to rip the ball but the contact with the other player directly prior to his attempt caused an accidental head collision!!

 

[belladonna]

I for one really hope the disciplinary committee don't hang the team of officials out to dry by deciding that, despite the careful review of the off-field video refs, there was in fact some "mitigation" that they somehow failed to spot.

 

[crossref]

It's going to be interesting to see what he gets

 

[shebeen]

[Replying to shebeen]

Well, quite. He's a serial head-high-shoulder-charger, IMHO.

Not sure I'd totally agree with "finally", though. He got 5 games for a dangerous tackle on Charlie Atkinson in 2020, 4 games (reduced to 3) in Jan this year for a dangerous tackle on Jack Clement, and red carded yesterday, presumably soon to be suspended.

What's a mystery though us why the punishments don't appear to be getting longer. Perhaps tbf the Jan one this year wasn't at particularly high speed. Yesterday's was pretty much at full tilt so I'd expect a far stiffer penalty, especially as it's an almost identical repeat so soon after the previous one.

Video compilation of OF's tackle technique below.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1614222984142528516

FYI, the second of three incidents you mention here(and started the thread) was an on field no card/referral. Farrell was still on the pitch to kick the winning drop goal, four match ban came from the citing.

 

[Camquin]

If rugby is to survive, we need mothers to be happy letting their sons and daughters play.
Which means doing everything we can to eliminate head collisions and cheap shots.

It does not mean bending the rules to permit stars playing at tournaments.

 

[belladonna]

Realistically, due to Farrell’s lack of eligibility for tackle school, the ban is either going to be four or five games. The rub for Smith is whether he can convince the all-Australian disciplinary panel that Farrell is not a seriel offender. This was the fly-half’s first red card on the international stage but the proximity of his previous offence - in January this year - means that the panel could consider him a repeat culprit.

Owen Farrell's fate lies in the hands of one of UK's master silks

England will call on one of the best barristers in the UK to defend Farrell at his disciplinary hearing on Tuesday

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[BikingBud]

Realistically, due to Farrell’s lack of eligibility for tackle school, the ban is either going to be four or five games. The rub for Smith is whether he can convince the all-Australian disciplinary panel that Farrell is not a seriel offender. This was the fly-half’s first red card on the international stage but the proximity of his previous offence - in January this year - means that the panel could consider him a repeat culprit.

Owen Farrell's fate lies in the hands of one of UK's master silks

England will call on one of the best barristers in the UK to defend Farrell at his disciplinary hearing on Tuesday

www.telegraph.co.uk

Behind the paywall so cannot read. A better beneficiary for the expected substantial fee might be not to hire the KC and to make a contribution to a players charity.

 

[belladonna]

This one should work

https://archive.is/IhaBv