If Biggar had carried on running I would have expected the referee to play advantage and come back to the offence later. A bad outcome emphasises the significance of an illegal act. If you punch someone hard enough to knock them out, that was a more serious punch than one that barely landed. Outcome is part of the whole, but if you think outcome is all that matters, we are on different planets. I'm looking for a balanced judgement that takes in all relevant elements.So, if everything had been exactly the same and happened in exactly the same way, except that Dan Biggar landed on his feet, and carried on running, the referee should have given a YC/RC and Russell would have been cited and given a suspension? Really?