Tuilagi ban reduced for taking irrelevant course

Rich_NL

Rugby Expert
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
1,621
Post Likes
499

Manu Tuilagi was sent off at the weekend for "fending" a defender off with a forearm/elbow straight to the face. Clear red, no argument. He has previous, so 6 weeks, down two for pleading guilty and apologising...

... and an extra week off as long as he attends a tackle course?

Is it that obviously and cynically just to have him back on the pitch in time for the last 6 Nations match?
 

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,479
Solutions
1
Post Likes
439
Current Referee grade:
Level 7
I suspect that the commonly-used course name is not entirely accurate as to the content.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,335
Post Likes
1,440

Manu Tuilagi was sent off at the weekend for "fending" a defender off with a forearm/elbow straight to the face. Clear red, no argument. He has previous, so 6 weeks, down two for pleading guilty and apologising...

... and an extra week off as long as he attends a tackle course?

Is it that obviously and cynically just to have him back on the pitch in time for the last 6 Nations match?
It isn't to get him back for the 6N.
It's for World Rugby to enable The Product to be as available as possible on the field.

He's been a professional player for how long? And been coached for how long by 'Elite' coaches. So he gets a week off his sentence for...more coaching.

It's a farce.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
I dunno perhaps WR wanted every single player to take the course, but was unable to mandate it, and almost no player will volunteer...

So they are doing the one thing they can do .. make sure that at everyone who gets a RC goes on the course

The way RC are handed out nowadays it won't be long until a large proportion of players have been on it
 

Rich_NL

Rugby Expert
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
1,621
Post Likes
499
This seems to be it

"Under the programme, any player in elite rugby around the world* who has been sanctioned for the first time by a disciplinary panel for foul play involving contact with the head may apply to substitute the final week/match of their sanction for a coaching intervention"

Fair enough :)

And yet, at 32 years of age, "don't elbow people in the face" shouldn't be something he hears for the first time...
 

BikingBud


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
708
Post Likes
251
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Couldn't see as I skimmed the link but how long is the programme?

Why is it a reactive intervention?

Why not proactive?

Elite players are full time professionals, get them all on the course and then when the incidents occur a more appropriate sanction can be applied.

For kids it might be appropriate but for professional players, 🤔 continually advising them of the laws and how they are expected to behave does not indicate a system that wants the players to take responsiblity for their own actions.🙈🙊🙉
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
Couldn't see as I skimmed the link but how long is the programme?

Why is it a reactive intervention?

Why not proactive?

Elite players are full time professionals, get them all on the course and then when the incidents occur a more appropriate sanction can be applied.

For kids it might be appropriate but for professional players, 🤔 continually advising them of the laws and how they are expected to behave does not indicate a system that wants the players to take responsiblity for their own actions.🙈🙊🙉
maybe WR would like it to be mandatory, but don't have the power to enforce that, and those who could enforce it (employers of players) all said 'nah, seems like a waste of time to me -- just a device to impose longer sanctions'
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,032
Post Likes
1,775
For kids it might be appropriate but for professional players, 🤔 continually advising them of the laws and how they are expected to behave does not indicate a system that wants the players to take responsiblity for their own actions.🙈🙊🙉
aye.
Its rather like sending professional drivers (ie those that drive as part of their job) in a speed awareness course.
If you are that ignorant of the law and don't take professional steps towards keeping to it (eg a satnav that bleeps at you when you exceed the speed limit - ive got several on my phone!) that suggests an issue... etc
merely an example. Many other jobs will have similar analogies I am sure.
 

Volun-selected


Referees in America
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
548
Post Likes
301
Location
United States
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Do they just get this as a one off? So if/when they get another red this option is no longer available?

Or is there another course they can trot out?
 

BikingBud


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
708
Post Likes
251
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Do they just get this as a one off? So if/when they get another red this option is no longer available?

Or is there another course they can trot out?
If you're in front of the beak again any expectation or consideration of mitigation or tugging your forelock should be wholly scorned upon. There should be an increase in sentence as clearly that haven't demonstrated good behaviour.

If they refuse the training then no mitigation for accepting to do it after being cited.

Seems fair and just.
 

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
nevermind - next year in RFU land it will be 1 week less for taking the course "Anatomy101 - Know your ass, waist and sternum from your elbow"

(too soon?)
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
If you're in front of the beak again any expectation or consideration of mitigation or tugging your forelock should be wholly scorned upon. There should be an increase in sentence as clearly that haven't demonstrated good behaviour.

If they refuse the training then no mitigation for accepting to do it after being cited.

Seems fair and just.
They do have that, repeated offending is an aggravating factor
 

BikingBud


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
708
Post Likes
251
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
maybe WR would like it to be mandatory, but don't have the power to enforce that, and those who could enforce it (employers of players) all said 'nah, seems like a waste of time to me -- just a device to impose longer sanctions'

Bizarre thought. Not a device to modify dangerous behaviour?
They do have that, repeated offending is an aggravating factor

Not quite sure you got my message:
They're given mitigation but are refusing to do the training, why
🤔


If they haven't done the training in the first place fine but there can be no claim for reduction of sentence as clearly they have not taken all reasonable measures to prevent it happening.

As @Rich_NL mentions it is up to the clubs to manage the risk but the focus has to come onto correcting/eradicating dangerous play.

Do the training get cited and haven't learnt from training get normal sentence,

Don't do the training get cited lack of training becomes aggravating factor take a longer ban;)
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
Yes.

By all accounts the course is effective in improving tackle techniques

My guess is that WR would like every elite player to do the course .. but for whatever reason have not been able to mandate it

But as to why the players, and the players employers don't all sign up voluntarily to do the course, and thereby improve tackle techniques, reduce RC and make the game safer I can only speculate? Any ideas?

Perhaps it's as simple as the amount it would cost
 

BikingBud


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
708
Post Likes
251
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Yes.

By all accounts the course is effective in improving tackle techniques

My guess is that WR would like every elite player to do the course .. but for whatever reason have not been able to mandate it

But as to why the players, and the players employers don't all sign up voluntarily to do the course, and thereby improve tackle techniques, reduce RC and make the game safer I can only speculate? Any ideas?

Perhaps it's as simple as the amount it would cost
Because the sanctions process is weak and it needs leadership to address it.

🤔

Do the training get cited and haven't learnt from training get normal sentence,

Don't do the training get cited lack of training becomes aggravating factor take a longer ban;)
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
Could be, yes.

But one might hope that everyone would want safer tackling and therefore would want every player to go on the course, regardless of the sanction regime ..
 
Top