Gloucester v Saracens

[shebeen]

This one should work

https://archive.is/IhaBv

"The panel also have the authority to add a week on for aggravating factors: this would be Farrell’s third ban in three years. The ban that Farrell received for his 2016 tackle on André Esterhuizen against South Africa at Twickenham was disregarded by the panel “due to its age”. It is expected that that precedent will continue on Tuesday."

That is incorrect. The 2016 incident was against Dan Robson/Wasps, he was suspended for just 2 weeks for this, essentially because
“In upholding the citing complaint, the committee found that Farrell had committed an act of foul play that warranted a red card,” EPCR said, in a statement. “It determined that the offence was at the low end of World Rugby’s sanctions and selected two weeks as the appropriate entry point.

“The committee added one week to the sanction as a deterrent in line with World Rugby’s memoranda regarding dangerous tackles and then reduced the sanction by one week due to the player’s clean disciplinary record, good character and excellent conduct at the hearing, before imposing a suspension of two weeks.”

Owen Farrell gets two-game ban but can play in Champions Cup final

Saracens’ Owen Farrell has joined his England team-mate Joe Marler in receiving a two-week ban after being cited for foul play during their European semi-final against Wasps

www.theguardian.com

The 2018 incident on Andre Esterhuizen was not a penalty, nor was it cited so no ban. (the only thing that came from it was Rassie learning how to do videos on social media).

 

[BikingBud]

No mention anywhere in the article about PLAYER SAFETY.

No mention about Basham's welfare and the potential long term injury.

Reporters that cannot get the facts correct.

A great and worthy article not!

From another telegraph article:

Farrell’s flashes of indiscipline often seem rooted in his overall frustration at the side’s performance. England were trailing 10-9 at the time of his tackle, coming just minutes after Steward’s yellow card and penalty try concession.
It is the kind of scenario when cool heads are required, but Farrell is such a fierce competitor that this was another moment when his attempt to impose himself went badly wrong

If he is allowed to play in the RWC, given the phrase in the above article where would you focus the effort of your niggling openside flanker?

I did write more about his conduct and approach to the game but felt it could jeopardise the site so culled it but perhaps the most appropriate question is:

• As a club coach, with Farrell in your squad, what would you do?

 

[Volun-selected]

Well at least it makes the Ford Farrell Smith conundrum a little simpler for Borthwick. I wouldn’t be surprised if Farrell misses the whole RWC.

 

[didds]

Farrell will go. You can put your house on that. Unless the ban somehow gets extended to months!

 

[crossref]

Farrell will go. You can put your house on that. Unless the ban somehow gets extended to months!

I don't think they would be allowed to replace him (assuming the squad has been registered with RWC already)
So however long the ban is, unless it was beyond the length of the whole tournament) they will take him and can use him when his ban ends

 

[BikingBud]

Mitchell has been called up and other teams haven't confirmed their teams yet so it might be the gate is still open.

 

[crossref]

Mitchell has been called up and other teams haven't confirmed their teams yet so it might be the gate is still open.

Its an interesting question
In reality, regardless of press announcements presumably every country waits until the very last moment before actually, officially, registering their squad with RWC.

So I bet England haven't actually done that yet

 

[BikingBud]

From Mick Cleary:

There should be no mitigation on the six week entry point. If there is, then World Rugby’s stance on trying to make the game safer should be considered a joke. Six weeks it has to be. Too bad it means that Farrell misses both England’s key World Cup pool matches against Argentina and Japan. That is what a punishment entails – privation in order to act as a deterrent. Bad Boy Blues.

Farrell’s likely loss is a major stuff-up on his part but his loss is not insurmountable as regards finding another playmaker. Replacing his leadership, his impact on the group, is something else entirely.

But answer me this if his leadership is so great and his impact upon the group so immense, why have England been performing so poorly for so long? And when some will take winning over performance but the team have not even been winning ugly it really is time to step and reform the plan.

 

[BikingBud]

Its an interesting question
In reality, regardless of press announcements presumably every country waits until the very last moment before actually, officially, registering their squad with RWC.

So I bet England haven't actually done that yet

There was comment from 2015 RWC:

Calling up injury replacements

Once teams have named their final 31 man squad players can only be replaced for medical or compassionate reasons. Teams must complete the relevant paperwork and send it to World Rugby along with a medical certificate where appropriate. Once signed off the replacement is not allowed to play for 48 hours. The replacement is permanent.

But couldn't find anything for 2023, all part of the keep them in the dark philosophy.

 

[didds]

But answer me this if his leadership is so great and his impact upon the group so immense, why have England been performing so poorly for so long? And when some will take winning over performance but the team have not even been winning ugly it really is time to step and reform the plan.

caveat:~ I am not a Farrell fan boy, though not a Farrell hater either.
So id suggest England's under achievement isn't down to one player, even one in an influential position that is skipper. Its not Farrell that is failing to make the hard yards up front, or getting turned over at the breakdown, or getting screwed in the front row. Its not Farrell that is continuing to select players out of position, or failing to create balance in key groupings/units.
And maybe - just maybe - poor though England certainly are, maybe they would actually be worse without his leadership and impact ? But that's a negative that cannot be proved...

Just an alternative 2p...

 

[BikingBud]

caveat:~ I am not a Farrell fan boy, though not a Farrell hater either.
So id suggest England's under achievement isn't down to one player, even one in an influential position that is skipper. Its not Farrell that is failing to make the hard yards up front, or getting turned over at the breakdown, or getting screwed in the front row. Its not Farrell that is continuing to select players out of position, or failing to create balance in key groupings/units.
And maybe - just maybe - poor though England certainly are, maybe they would actually be worse without his leadership and impact ? But that's a negative that cannot be proved...

Just an alternative 2p...

Sorry it's a different discussion and I shouldn't have added that but it is Farrell that is kicking good ball away, it is Farrell that prevents one of our most exciting youngsters for many years getting any ball, it is Farrell when asked what went wrong after coming off the park after a terrible performance against Scotland stated that he has no idea and says he will have to look at the video, it was Farrell who played in the last RWC final and was unable to recognise what was going on when the game was quite clearly going away from them and apply all that tactical nous and leadership to change the game. I may be old school but outside half is your key tactical decision maker and if he cannot do that then nothing else works.

We used to have proper leaders in many positions that could make effective and correct tactical decisions and show passion and commitment, holding out for a win against NZ, Wellington 2003, when they were down to 13 is a whole world of difference in leadership, commitment, performance than this last weekend.

Players came on, had impact, knew the game and played to win and changed games and won eg Mike Catt. Even in the final they had the self belief and confidence to hold their nerve and play the game to their strengths. For the current generation I really do not know what their strengths are, what the game plan is, what the coach is trying to set up as patterns of play, there is some whooping an hollering because the opposition knocked on whereas tapping your mate's arse after they prevented a try by a monster tackle (munch) used to be all that was required.

That said none of this changes the dangerous play but watching such a dire spectacle and being constantly told how wonderful he is, perhaps it's that same thing where people perceive that German cars are quality or the Beatles were great.

ETA- From the outset I do not hate him but can't see why everybody seems to think he is a wunderkind. I've said it now and I'm going to sit quietly.

 

[didds]

so when Farrell didnt play in 2022 6N due to injury Enland's results were

loss to Scotland
win against italy (quelle surprise)
win against a poor wales (who still gained a losing BP)
loss to Ireland
loss to France

and he wasnt even there to kick ball away and not pass it.
I agree he is a pants captain - but that's on first Jones and now Borthwick. But it aint Farrell alone that is making England so poor.
I do agree with many of your points made in that 3rd paragraph - but thats not farrell either. Why dont pro players know the game plan? IS there a game plan? Its not evident there is anything but "get the ball and see what happens " sometimes. unless the game plan really is "pop pass smash and repeat" until the ball is lost - cos that seems to be a lot of eng;lands play for the past 2 or 3 years.

As for wunderkind - see my opening caveat somewhere up there ^^^^

 

[belladonna]

On the question of mitigation, isn't one of the things the disciplinary committee will have to consider tomorrow, is whether the actions of OF were ever legal - because if not, mitigation can't be applied?

And it's such a shame that we can no longer hear the deliberations of the officials as they look at all the angles when deciding RC/YC because it all takes place behind-the-scenes in the "bunker".

Two other good articles in the Torygraft today, one from Warrent Gatland and the other from Alix Popham (a former Wales back-rower diagnosed with early onset dementia and probable chronic traumatic encephalopathy, and "one of more than 200 former stars involved in a lawsuit against the game’s authorities".)

Warren Gatland

He has always been a good defender. I selected him for three British and Irish Lions tours – in 2013, 2017 and 2021 – and I have always loved his aggression. But with Owen the issue has always been about the height of his tackling.

He has had a few instances now when he has tried to be dominant and win the collision by being aggressive but got it badly wrong which has led to bans. The problem is that at times he goes into contact too upright, and in reviewing his hit on Taine Basham on Saturday night, I have no doubt it was a red card.

Alix Popham

“Farrell keeps doing it, so he’s clearly not learnt from going to World Rugby’s tackle school. The bans that are being put in place for foul play are not stringent enough,” insisted Popham.

“World Rugby should bring in a points system, like you have for driving offences. You should get so many points per offence and if you reach a maximum figure, you should be banned for the rest of a season.

“Something has to be done because the system which is currently in place clearly isn’t working. The way to tackle the problem and consequences of head-high challenges causing Traumatic Brain Injuries [TBI] to the victims is by putting an effective deterrent in place to rid rugby of the problem.”

(The Alix Popham article also cites a "previous" by OF I hadn't picked up on, apparently he got a two-week ban in 2016 for a high tackle on Wasps’ scrum-half Dan Robson during a European semi-final, before his five weeks for knocking out Charlie Atkinson.)

Owen Farrell's red card caused a bit of anger with my Wales players

One thing is for certain: if we face England at the World Cup, we won't fear them

www.telegraph.co.uk

Owen Farrell should face season-ending ban if he cannot tackle safely, says Alix Popham

'Farrell keeps doing it, so he’s clearly not learnt from going to World Rugby’s tackle school,' the former Wales back-rower said

www.telegraph.co.uk

https://archive.is/8zb1y

https://archive.is/vrYJ3

 

[Dickie E]

And it's such a shame that we can no longer hear the deliberations of the officials as they look at all the angles when deciding RC/YC because it all takes place behind-the-scenes in the "bunker".

that's a good point. Maybe a message should go on the screen explaining the official's reasoning for a red card something like "player has made direct contact with opponent's head. High degree of force. No mitigation".

 

[Camquin]

In this case, the "tackled" player failed his HIA.
That alone should prevent it from being low end.

 

[didds]

In this case, the "tackled" player failed his HIA.
That alone should prevent it from being low end.

Though that is outcome based. That just means oif there is no failed HIA, the "tackler" got lucky, and is rewarded with a lighter punishment.
Unless there is a thought process of "if its all the same ban whatever the outcome, then players will just remove any trace of care" ... and one cant square that circle...

 

[belladonna]

Hearing to begin at 9am by video link. The independent judicial committee is made up of chair Adam Casselden SC (Australia) and former Australia internationals John Langford and David Croft.

Owen Farrell ban hearing live updates as England captain discovers punishment

The England captain is set to appear before a disciplinary committee today after a red card tackle on Wales' Taine Basham at Twickenham

www.walesonline.co.uk

 

[didds]

walesonline has to be the most horrible website in the known univese. Is the same available anywhere vaguely watchable elsewhere does anybody know?

 

[belladonna]

Though that is outcome based.

Isn't outcome is an important factor though?

WR guidelines for assessing severity include outcome as one of the criteria:

The Judicial Officer/Disciplinary Committee assesses the seriousness of the Foul Play (low-end, mid-range, top-end) by reference to the following factors (see Regulation 17.18.1):
[...]
h. effect on the victim (for example, extent of injury, removal of victim from the game);

World Rugby Passport - Red Cards/Citings

And the WR sanctions for foul play conclude with an outcome-based rider:

... in cases where the player’s actions constitute mid-range or top end offending for any type of offence which [...] result in serious/gross consequences to the health of the victim, the Judicial Officers and/or Disciplinary Committees may impose any period of suspension including a suspension for life.

World Rugby Passport - Appendix 2 - WORLD RUGBY SANCTIONS FOR FOUL PLAY (REGULATION 17)

passport.world.rugby

 

[didds]

i am just uncomfortable with outcome based decsions. as the perpetrator may well end up with a lower penalty through sheer luck (for him/her), or the evasive actions of the person being perpetrated upon. It doesn't diminish the actual action that is being punished. and if a lesser penalty is administered because of what amounts to luck that leaves the perp available (quicker?) to do it again.