Law question- Farrell tackle

[Ymx]

For me it’s a clear red. Contact to chin, leading with shoulder, no mitigation.

But there’s a surprising number of comments saying it’s fine??



Thoughts?

[dkm57]

Ref and TMO funked it. IMO the ref was pretty one eyed throughout, god forbid he should have the balls/temerity to penalise St Farrell.

[GogLais]

For me it’s a clear red. Contact to chin, leading with shoulder, no mitigation.

But there’s a surprising number of comments saying it’s fine??



Thoughts?

I didn’t look all the way down admittedly - my porridge is going cold - but most of comments I saw go red.
It’s unbelievable that it wasn’t a red.

[Ymx]

Most did say it was red. It was just really the top one and a few responses to that.

Slightly exaggerated the many part. Just surprised there were any, so thought would get the bored view.

[Raggs]

I can't see how it's not at least a yellow. And that's with trying to claim the carrier is leading with his head low, and that's a bit of a stretch

[Grandpa]

Most did say it was red. It was just really the top one and a few responses to that.

Slightly exaggerated the many part. Just surprised there were any, so thought would get the bored view.

I suspect they were Sarries supporters... should be red and with his poor history a long ban...

[Biffer]

How does he keep getting away with this shit.

[SaintK]

Most did say it was red. It was just really the top one and a few responses to that.

Slightly exaggerated the many part. Just surprised there were any, so thought would get the bored view.

I suspect they were Sarries supporters... should be red and with his poor history a long ban...

When was his last red card for a high shot?

[Grandpa]

Most did say it was red. It was just really the top one and a few responses to that.

Slightly exaggerated the many part. Just surprised there were any, so thought would get the bored view.

I suspect they were Sarries supporters... should be red and with his poor history a long ban...

When was his last red card for a high shot?

Five week ban in 2020 after a quick Google. Where he knocked the guy out... not sure how many of his seven yellows were for high tackles?

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/owen-far ... s-england/

[C69]

Clear red, it was wholly bottled by the officials.
FFS player safety is paramount.

[Ymx]

Just reading that 2020 incident …

“There was no real intent to do that. That was never what I was trying to do, but at the same time that is what happened and you have a good look at yourself when that happens.

“In terms of technique, yeah, I want to get better. More than anything I’m excited to play,” he continued after England coach Eddie Jones gave him a vote of confidence to continue as captain and earn his 84th Test cap for his country in Rome.

“I have been working on everything, not just tackling technique, which I would work on anyway. The main thing is I can’t wait to get out on the field and get playing.

He’s obviously still “working” on it …

[SaintK]

I suspect they were Sarries supporters... should be red and with his poor history a long ban...

When was his last red card for a high shot?

Five week ban in 2020 after a quick Google. Where he knocked the guy out... not sure how many of his seven yellows were for high tackles?

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/owen-far ... s-england/

On Charlie Atkinson of Wasps, that's the only one I can remember.
Not to defend Farrell as he should be cited, but Creevy is on his second ban of the season for high shots and Tuisuie his third in 12 months.

[SaintK]

Clear red, it was wholly bottled by the officials.
FFS player safety is paramount.

No, just by Dickson who overuled the TMO

[Lobby]

Ref and TMO funked it. IMO the ref was pretty one eyed throughout, god forbid he should have the balls/temerity to penalise St Farrell.

Not so much one-eyed as no-eyed. He missed quite a few fairly obvious offences by both teams, and at other times invented offences that hadn't happened. That added to his mystifying decision to dismiss the TMO's intervention on the Farrell tackle (which was a red all day long) demonstrated his incompetence throughout the game.

[Biffer]

When was his last red card for a high shot?

Five week ban in 2020 after a quick Google. Where he knocked the guy out... not sure how many of his seven yellows were for high tackles?

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/owen-far ... s-england/

On Charlie Atkinson of Wasps, that's the only one I can remember.
Not to defend Farrell as he should be cited, but Creevy is on his second ban of the season for high shots and Tuisuie his third in 12 months.

What annoys me is the number of times he should have got a red or been banned doesn’t correspond to the number of times he should have been.

[sockwithaticket]

When was his last red card for a high shot?

Five week ban in 2020 after a quick Google. Where he knocked the guy out... not sure how many of his seven yellows were for high tackles?

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/owen-far ... s-england/

On Charlie Atkinson of Wasps, that's the only one I can remember.
Not to defend Farrell as he should be cited, but Creevy is on his second ban of the season for high shots and Tuisuie his third in 12 months.

He also got a red for doing the same to Dan Robson. That one ended up being rescinded (unjustifiably imo).

[SaintK]

Five week ban in 2020 after a quick Google. Where he knocked the guy out... not sure how many of his seven yellows were for high tackles?

https://www.rugbypass.com/news/owen-far ... s-england/

On Charlie Atkinson of Wasps, that's the only one I can remember.
Not to defend Farrell as he should be cited, but Creevy is on his second ban of the season for high shots and Tuisuie his third in 12 months.

What annoys me is the number of times he should have got a red or been banned doesn’t correspond to the number of times he should have been.

Haters going to hate no matter what

[sockwithaticket]

Straight red imo. There's no possibility of mitigation because he trails his right arm to lead with shoulder, never attempting to wrap and thus never makes a legal tackle attempt. If the act is illegal from the get go, mitigation doesn't apply.

For me it’s a clear red. Contact to chin, leading with shoulder, no mitigation.

But there’s a surprising number of comments saying it’s fine??

Thoughts?

For all that he has his detractors, he also has a number of fanboys willing to defend him to the hilt over almost anything.

[Kiwias]

Most did say it was red. It was just really the top one and a few responses to that.

Slightly exaggerated the many part. Just surprised there were any, so thought would get the bored view.

The top response is amazing.

How can he get any lower than that

[C69]

Clear red, it was wholly bottled by the officials.
FFS player safety is paramount.

No, just by Dickson who overuled the TMO

Ok fair enough.
What a stupid call.

[Grandpa]

On Charlie Atkinson of Wasps, that's the only one I can remember.
Not to defend Farrell as he should be cited, but Creevy is on his second ban of the season for high shots and Tuisuie his third in 12 months.

What annoys me is the number of times he should have got a red or been banned doesn’t correspond to the number of times he should have been.

Haters going to hate no matter what

It's not about hate though is it? It's just generally when someone does something bad, people don't like it... if George Ford had a reputation for high shots, I'm sure he'd get similar grief... same with Dan Carter or Johnny Wilkinson?

[Paddington Bear]

Dickson had an appalling game as per, with shockers flying both ways.

For the incident itself, this was how I saw it:
- bloke picks and goes down the blindside unexpectedly, Faz is not expecting to make a tackle
- he’s too upright as he’s resting and has left himself no time to adjust. He tackles with a rugby league style check
- the Gloucester player’s head snaps back, clearly in real time. I saw it and went ‘oh shit’, Lol saw it and made a joke about a broken nose. As it was down the blindside I assume Dickson not unreasonably was on the other side and didn’t see it
- play goes on for a fair amount of time and it takes the TMO clearly a long time to identify an incident
- she eventually does. Dickson says he can only go back one phase. Did he mishear ‘foul play’ and instead think she was bringing up something technical? Either way he was flustered and she wasn’t forceful enough.

You can talk anything down to a yellow now but IMHO it was a clear red, at the very least it was a Gloucester pen and Faz off the pitch, does anyone else knock over a 40m drop goal in howling wind? Probably not. If I were a Gloucester fan I’d be furious. With all that said, Skivington handled the post match interview well, but on his ‘control
The controllable’ he left out that Carreras missed from in front of the posts and pretty much all of Sarries’ points came from glaring Gloucester errors. A shame that a proper fiesty game will end up being talked about due to the ref.

Dickson simply isn’t up to it. The crowd got to him, both sides being fairly intense got to him and absolutely god knows what was going on in his head at the end. The ‘St Faz’ stuff I don’t think really applies to this case though - the TMO told him there was foul play and he needed to go back! He just inexplicably bottled it

[SaintK]

What annoys me is the number of times he should have got a red or been banned doesn’t correspond to the number of times he should have been.

Haters going to hate no matter what

It's not about hate though is it? It's just generally when someone does something bad, people don't like it... if George Ford had a reputation for high shots, I'm sure he'd get similar grief... same with Dan Carter or Johnny Wilkinson?

Fair call, but I get the impression that Farrell generates a lot of ill feeling not just in relation to high tackles.

[Blackmac]

Funny how Farrell always seems to injure himself during these tackles and then makes a miraculous recovery once we get the inevitable play on.

[Ymx]

Funny how Farrell always seems to injure himself during these tackles and then makes a miraculous recovery once we get the inevitable play on.

I’m curious to the explosive situation of what happens when Farrell tackles Sexton??

Obviously it would involve both of them writhing around on the ground like there had been a drone attack. Sexton would probably throw in a few death shudders. And then both being up and running around a few minutes later.

[SaintK]

Funny how Farrell always seems to injure himself during these tackles and then makes a miraculous recovery once we get the inevitable play on.

I’m curious to the explosive situation of what happens when Farrell tackles Sexton??

Obviously it would involve both of them writhing around on the ground like there had been a drone attack. Sexton would probably throw in a few death shudders. And then both being up and running around a few minutes later.

Farrell rarely goes down, now Dan Biggar on the other hand

[petej]

Haters going to hate no matter what

It's not about hate though is it? It's just generally when someone does something bad, people don't like it... if George Ford had a reputation for high shots, I'm sure he'd get similar grief... same with Dan Carter or Johnny Wilkinson?

Fair call, but I get the impression that Farrell generates a lot of ill feeling not just in relation to high tackles.

Because he's been the darling of the English media which most not casual English rugby fans (people who actually watch the english premiership and rugby outside of world cups and 6n) and many rugby fans worldwide think are bellends. They've spared him from the criticism that bits of his foul play and poor form has warranted.

Farrell tackle technique has always been quite high to make dominant hits which the casuals love but don’t note the times when he flys out the line and misses creating a massive hole in our defence.

[Paddington Bear]

Funny how Farrell always seems to injure himself during these tackles and then makes a miraculous recovery once we get the inevitable play on.

Correct me if I’m wrong but Faz played through all the phases that followed subsequently from my viewing?

[GogLais]

In a way it’s a pity that this particular player was involved, the debating point for me is the refereeing, OF is what he is.

[Tichtheid]

In a way it’s a pity that this particular player was involved, the debating point for me is the refereeing, OF is what he is.

Exactly my thoughts.

I actually quite like Farrell, his piss and moaning is all part of his competitiveness, which I admire, unfortunately and like his team mate Itoje who is another fantastic player, the extra stuff can overshadow how good they are, in fact if Farrell hadn't gubbed the Glaws player Itoje had his leg outstretched as if to trip him.

The debating point is the that the ref got the call wrong and why don't referees know the laws?

[Simian]

In a way it’s a pity that this particular player was involved, the debating point for me is the refereeing, OF is what he is.

Exactly my thoughts.

I actually quite like Farrell, his piss and moaning is all part of his competitiveness, which I admire, unfortunately and like his team mate Itoje who is another fantastic player, the extra stuff can overshadow how good they are, in fact if Farrell hadn't gubbed the Glaws player Itoje had his leg outstretched as if to trip him.

The debating point is the that the ref got the call wrong and why don't referees know the laws?

Agree with all of that. I think it's worth pointing out how crazy some of the wording of the current TMO protocols is tho.

https://resources.world.rugby/worldrugb ... y-2022.pdf

The part of Section 3 (Protocol detail) detailing the protocol for live referrals relating to Law 9 (Foul Play) says Foul Play "may be referred up until the game restarts". But it also says live referrals relating to Law 9 (Foul Play) "should be before the start of the next phase of play". Dangerous play is one of the specific examples the protocol gives in this section, so the protocol essentially says that dangerous play may be flagged up as long as play hasn't restarted but should be flagged up before the next phase starts.

Why Dickson got so hung up on the 'should' statement (and interpreted it as overriding the 'may' statement) when no one else seems to have is a total mystery.

[Niegs]

It'd be funny to be so hung up on semantics of when TMO can be used re: foul play while consistently ignoring written law around collapsing the ruck, shoulders above hips, feeding the scrum, etc...

[Simian]

It'd be funny to be so hung up on semantics of when TMO can be used re: foul play while consistently ignoring written law around collapsing the ruck, shoulders above hips, feeding the scrum, etc...

Absolutely. It's maddening.
My point was really just that the protocols are stupidly worded. It's pretty wild that they brought in new protocols to clarify the procedure that should be used and remove inconsistencies but that those protocols literally say you can do something but should do something else.

[petej]

In a way it’s a pity that this particular player was involved, the debating point for me is the refereeing, OF is what he is.

The thing is throughout his career Farrell has got away with high dangerous hits. There is a reluctance to punish him. If he isn't cited just add it to the pile.

[Torquemada 1420]

"Farrell" and "tackle" you say?

[Paddington Bear]

In a way it’s a pity that this particular player was involved, the debating point for me is the refereeing, OF is what he is.

The thing is throughout his career Farrell has got away with high dangerous hits. There is a reluctance to punish him. If he isn't cited just add it to the pile.

This doesn’t fit nicely into this category given that the TMO spotted and tried to have him red carded, only for Dickson to have a brain fart. He’ll get a 2-4 week ban, potentially would have got less had he been carded.

[Uncle fester]

Red red red
Any further questions?

[inactionman]

In a way it’s a pity that this particular player was involved, the debating point for me is the refereeing, OF is what he is.

The thing is throughout his career Farrell has got away with high dangerous hits. There is a reluctance to punish him. If he isn't cited just add it to the pile.

Indeed.

He's still on my shitlist because of this:

[Biffer]

In a way it’s a pity that this particular player was involved, the debating point for me is the refereeing, OF is what he is.

The thing is throughout his career Farrell has got away with high dangerous hits. There is a reluctance to punish him. If he isn't cited just add it to the pile.

This doesn’t fit nicely into this category given that the TMO spotted and tried to have him red carded, only for Dickson to have a brain fart. He’ll get a 2-4 week ban, potentially would have got less had he been carded.

I bet he gets off with it because the ref looked at it at the time.

An entirely English panel looking at the foul play of the English captain a few weeks before the six nations? I think we can be clear that even if he does get a ban it’ll be structured so he gets a game in before the first game.

[C69]

The thing is throughout his career Farrell has got away with high dangerous hits. There is a reluctance to punish him. If he isn't cited just add it to the pile.

This doesn’t fit nicely into this category given that the TMO spotted and tried to have him red carded, only for Dickson to have a brain fart. He’ll get a 2-4 week ban, potentially would have got less had he been carded.

I bet he gets off with it because the ref looked at it at the time.

An entirely English panel looking at the foul play of the English captain a few weeks before the six nations? I think we can be clear that even if he does get a ban it’ll be structured so he gets a game in before the first game.

Yip the fetid RFU will not ban one of their own for the 6N.