Law question- Farrell tackle

[sockwithaticket]

Struggling to think of any examples of a long ban affecting a career in that way. Lavanini is probably the most banned player I can think of, and he's picked up 75 international caps and two lucrative stints with Tigers and Clermont after making a name for himself as one of the dirtiest players in pro rugby.

21 cards (4 red and 17 yellows) so far is pretty much unbeatable, and yet he’s still employed and still picking up caps.

Dylan Hartley only actually got four red cards, but was cited a further four times with total bans of 60 weeks. Cost him a World Cup appearance but not much else. Might even have extended his career through regular rest periods.

He also seems to have the full suite of offences: an eye gouge, a punch, an elbow, a bite, a head butt and abusing a match official.

The headbutt made him unavailable for a Lions tour. Whether or not he'd have been selected is difficult to say, but I don't recall hooker being a position of particular strength at the time for any home nation.

[Ymx]

You could add Dean Greyling to that list, after he targeted McCaw.

[Sandstorm]

Every team always says they want to be clean and nice, but also love “an enforcer”. Hence why these guys keep on playing.

[Camroc2]

We all know that Farrell has lots of previous for no arms shoulder hits; much of it ignored by the officials.

He needs time off to learn that his technique is wrong, and 4 weeks doesn't cut it.

[JM2K6]

[Enzedder]

Here he is doing the course

[Sandstorm]

Here he is doing the course

Right arm is still tucked!!! Fail.

[Torquemada 1420]

Owen Farrell, we all thought, had learned. Clearly not though, but in the wake of Joe Marler’s peculiarly-arranged suspension last week (which Loose Pass looked at) all eyes will now be on the ban that surely is coming from the beaks.

Farrell is likely to be looking at least six weeks, considering his previous (his last ban was in September 2020 for the same offence and was five weeks). There is the likelihood he can go to the World Rugby intervention program known as ‘tackle school’ to shave a week off (although how many times can you go to tackle school and still get it so wrong). There is also a possibility of mitigation for something reducing the ban by two weeks, although again, how many times can you be banned for the same thing before bans are simply unable to be mitigated?

All of which could reduce the ban to three weeks, leaving Farrell conveniently available for the Scotland Six Nations opener.

But. Those three game weeks include a Premiership week in which Farrell would normally not be available as a part of the England squad, which is yet to be named, so it would be chicanery of the highest order were that week to count, or were Farrell not to be picked for England and then added the day after Saracens play Bristol, never mind the aforementioned ‘rules’ on how bans can be reduced or mitigated. Loose Pass awaits the outcome with interest.

[Torquemada 1420]

Struggling to think of any examples of a long ban affecting a career in that way. Lavanini is probably the most banned player I can think of, and he's picked up 75 international caps and two lucrative stints with Tigers and Clermont after making a name for himself as one of the dirtiest players in pro rugby.

Jamie Cudmore.
Dylan Hartley
Chris Ashton

The irony being Thugmore is suing ASM for suffering headaches post career.

[Torquemada 1420]

You could add Dean Greyling to that list, after he targeted McCaw.

A few more
1) McRae on ROG.
2) Grey on Hill.
3) The whole of NZ (apparently) on BOD.
4) Harry Ellis and Andy Foode who specifically targeted Wilkinson's leg just after he'd returned from serous injury to the same (Leicester v Falcons at Welford Rd which, IIRC, was a midweek game). This one stuck in my head as particularly egregious since Wilkinson was their intl team mate. Also shows what a bunch of c**ts Leicester are.

Note the 1st one is of particular interests since it was clear policy to injure a player in a lesser game to prevent him from playing in subsequent ones of importance.

[Ymx]

McRae claims ROG threw elbows at him twice in the lead up, which is why he lost his shit. Not sure if I believe it, but he seems to.

The examples were of people whose career went downhill after such an attack, as I think your mate JM had said he couldn’t think of one.

[Torquemada 1420]

McRae claims ROG threw elbows at him twice in the lead up, which is why he lost his shit. Not sure if I believe it, but he seems to.

The examples were of people whose career went downhill after such an attack, as I think your mate JM had said he couldn’t think of one.

Nah. Pretty sure Saint Kev and Umaga had long careers after and the Leicester duo certainly did.

[Ymx]

You seem to be struggling with the difference of “any” v “every”.

Plus Saint Kev wasn’t carded.

[Torquemada 1420]

You seem to be struggling with the difference of “any” v “every”.

Plus Saint Kev wasn’t carded.

Eh? Who used either qualifier?

[MungoMan]

Here he is doing the course

Right arm is still tucked!!! Fail.

[Ymx]

You seem to be struggling with the difference of “any” v “every”.

Plus Saint Kev wasn’t carded.

Eh? Who used either qualifier?

Fark me Torq, I even told you.

Scroll and read. Wake up pal !!

[Ymx]

Someone kindly created a highlights reel.

One for Toga

[Ymx]

Nearly missed this (in the video)



From our neighbour.

[Gumboot]

Nearly missed this (in the video)



From our neighbour.

Statistics, eh.

Do you reckon Jake actually believes this hokum, or is just taking the piss?

[Guy Smiley]

Jake's ritin' skillz would suggest he's serious.

[Ymx]

His mathsing skilz need some work too

For a start 1 in 5000. Is 0.02% not what he wrote.

Plus it’s not just 1, ffs. 2 red cards. Plus a plethora of missed red cards.

[Torquemada 1420]

His mathsing skilz need some work too

For a start 1 in 5000. Is 0.02% not what he wrote.

Plus it’s not just 1, ffs. 2 red cards. Plus a plethora of missed red cards.

[Certain Navigator]

McRae claims ROG threw elbows at him twice in the lead up, which is why he lost his shit. Not sure if I believe it, but he seems to.

The examples were of people whose career went downhill after such an attack, as I think your mate JM had said he couldn’t think of one.

Nah. Pretty sure Saint Kev and Umaga had long careers after and the Leicester duo certainly did.

Not internationally — Umaga didn't play for the ABs again after 2005.

[sockwithaticket]

His mathsing skilz need some work too

For a start 1 in 5000. Is 0.02% not what he wrote.

Plus it’s not just 1, ffs. 2 red cards. Plus a plethora of missed red cards.

Technically it is only one red card, two of the three bans have come from citings. Three bans for the same offence in the span of seven years. Which has seen some people try and cast it as not that bad, but that view doesn't bear any scrutiny whatsoever. Lavanini and Aki are the only other seasoned internationals currently playing who I can think of with a comparable number of bans.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Lavanini and Aki are the only other seasoned internationals currently playing who I can think of with a comparable number of bans.

Justice4Joe

[Torquemada 1420]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... borthwick/

[JM2K6]

Very confused by the list of people with bad disciplinary records who had huge careers being held up as people who suffered career wise because of bans

[JM2K6]

Nearly missed this (in the video)



From our neighbour.

Statistics, eh.

Do you reckon Jake actually believes this hokum, or is just taking the piss?

Someone should tell him that sometimes illegal tackles are penalised without cards - and sometimes advantage is played and the penalty doesn't even get given!

[sockwithaticket]

Lavanini and Aki are the only other seasoned internationals currently playing who I can think of with a comparable number of bans.

Justice4Joe

Since the Celts are so exercised by him, he gets a pass.

[Tichtheid]

FFS

RFU intervenes to let Borthwick pick Farrell in England Six Nations squad

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... d-scotland

[JM2K6]

FFS

RFU intervenes to let Borthwick pick Farrell in England Six Nations squad

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... d-scotland

Bit tabloid by the Guardian. He's allowed to join the England training squad. In normal circumstances a player in the squad can be released to play a club match, so technically he's missing the weekend's match. Yes, we all know he wouldn't have been, but that's not the point.

It's exactly how every other nation has worked this loophole tbh. It needs clearing up, but this is somewhat confected outrage being stoked by the papers here.

[Tichtheid]

FFS

RFU intervenes to let Borthwick pick Farrell in England Six Nations squad

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... d-scotland

Bit tabloid by the Guardian. He's allowed to join the England training squad. In normal circumstances a player in the squad can be released to play a club match, so technically he's missing the weekend's match. Yes, we all know he wouldn't have been, but that's not the point.

It's exactly how every other nation has worked this loophole tbh. It needs clearing up, but this is somewhat confected outrage being stoked by the papers here.

Aye whatever

[JM2K6]

FFS

RFU intervenes to let Borthwick pick Farrell in England Six Nations squad

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/ ... d-scotland

Bit tabloid by the Guardian. He's allowed to join the England training squad. In normal circumstances a player in the squad can be released to play a club match, so technically he's missing the weekend's match. Yes, we all know he wouldn't have been, but that's not the point.

It's exactly how every other nation has worked this loophole tbh. It needs clearing up, but this is somewhat confected outrage being stoked by the papers here.

Aye whatever

Odd response! What exactly do you see is the problem here? Any potential fixture is counted as part of the ban - that's the downside of doing it per match instead of per wee k (which has its own problems)

[Tichtheid]

Bit tabloid by the Guardian. He's allowed to join the England training squad. In normal circumstances a player in the squad can be released to play a club match, so technically he's missing the weekend's match. Yes, we all know he wouldn't have been, but that's not the point.

It's exactly how every other nation has worked this loophole tbh. It needs clearing up, but this is somewhat confected outrage being stoked by the papers here.

Aye whatever

Odd response! What exactly do you see is the problem here? Any potential fixture is counted as part of the ban - that's the downside of doing it per match instead of per wee k (which has its own problems)

Since you don't seem to care about the spirit or the letter of the law here I don't intend getting into a long to and fro over it.

However, this is a big "Fuck You" to Steve Thompson and any other ex-player suffering from the known consequences of head collisions.

I'd have some respect for a reply that said, yes the ban was too short in the first place and the RFU should be taking a lead in eradicating shoulder shots to the head, not finding loopholes to get their guy on the park asap.

This is probably the single most important issue facing rugby at the moment, hiding behind convention and what other unions have done is a cowardly move which won't pave the way for any change.

No one really gives a fuck.

[JM2K6]

Aye whatever

Odd response! What exactly do you see is the problem here? Any potential fixture is counted as part of the ban - that's the downside of doing it per match instead of per wee k (which has its own problems)

Since you don't seem to care about the spirit or the letter of the law here I don't intend getting into a long to and fro over it.

However, this is a big "Fuck You" to Steve Thompson and any other ex-player suffering from the known consequences of head collisions.

I'd have some respect for a reply that said, yes the ban was too short in the first place and the RFU should be taking a lead in eradicating shoulder shots to the head, not finding loopholes to get their guy on the park asap.

This is probably the single most important issue facing rugby at the moment, hiding behind convention and what other unions have done is a cowardly move which won't pave the way for any change.

No one really gives a fuck.

I think my bona fides on the discussion around head contact make that first paragraph wildly unfair, that is a real dickhead thing to say and nothing in this conversation has deserved that accusation.

A technicality over which match constitutes one that can be counted for the purposes of the ban has very little to do with your assertion that the ban was too short to begin with. These are totally separate issues: the RFU have confirmed that the match that Farrell would potentially have been available for counts (which is fair enough) and the ban in your view was far too short.

I think compared to every other incident like this, it's been handled pretty consistently. I am totally with you that this whole thing needs a rethink, but it's a little strange to me that this is the incident that's triggered so much extended outrage when it wasn't even close to being the most dangerous headshot of the weekend, let alone one that demands a huge ban.

I am completely on board with the sport needing to make a drastic change to how players approach contact situations. However a bigger ban for Farrell would've been out of sync with how this stuff is handled across the globe.

The RFU confirming he can be in England camp and be counted as missing the club match is consistent with reality, in which a player in camp can still play for their club. I don't really see an argument against that that doesn't go down the dodgy route of arguing about which matches a player may or may not have been selected for, which can be incredibly subjective.

In other words, this really isn't a story and pointing that out doesn't make me some sort of apologist for concussion, and I'm a bit pissed off you suggested that.

[Torquemada 1420]

Very confused by the list of people with bad disciplinary records who had huge careers being held up as people who suffered career wise because of bans

I was waiting for YMX to explain it to me.

[Torquemada 1420]

It's exactly how every other nation has worked this loophole tbh. It needs clearing up, but this is somewhat confected outrage being stoked by the papers here.

Every, you say?

[Ymx]

Very confused by the list of people with bad disciplinary records who had huge careers being held up as people who suffered career wise because of bans

I was waiting for YMX to explain it to me.

I wrote
“completely ignores the deterrent of being banned for a long time, and what that can do to an individual’s career/contract.”

JM said
“Struggling to think of any examples of a long ban affecting a career in that way. “

A list of those whose career was badly subsequently affected with the bans was listed.

And here we are. Playing with semantics!!

[JM2K6]

But... they evidently weren't badly affected. They had superb careers after long bans. I genuinely struggle to think of a single example where contracts were at risk as a result, too (I'm sure there must be one?).

This is a sport where long absences for injury are expected, where disciplinary procedures are considered part and parcel of the sport, and where "talent" trumps everything else.

[Sandstorm]

But... they evidently weren't badly affected. They had superb careers after long bans. I genuinely struggle to think of a single example where contracts were at risk as a result, too (I'm sure there must be one?).

This is a sport where long absences for injury are expected, where disciplinary procedures are considered part and parcel of the sport, and where "talent" trumps everything else.

From Wiki:

“SA lock Jannes Labuschagne:
Back in 2002, Springbok lock Jannes Labuschagne received a straight red card for a late challenge on England star Jonny Wilkinson at Twickenham. In total the lock earned 11 caps for the Springboks but this crazy challenge on Wilkinson was probably what ended his international career”