Law question- Farrell tackle

[Biffer]

Spoken like someone who's not looked too closely at how Biggar plays his rugby. He's hardly squeaky clean and has gotten away with plenty of pretty awful tackles and cheap shots himself (and the occasional bit of play acting for the ref). Let's not whitewash him just because of who he's needling.

Yeah nah maybe...

Farrell deserved the confrontation regardless of who delivered it. The reaction speaks volumes about Farrell's character. That's the issue.

Totally agree

Just don't forget Biggar is also a bit of a cunt

No danger of that.

[Hal Jordan]

I'll go with 5, expect loads of pictures of visiting dying orphans and stroking stray puppies.

If they told him to stroke a puppy he'd probably kick it away instead

Not to worry, Steward will catch it on the chase.

[Grandpa]

Spoken like someone who's not looked too closely at how Biggar plays his rugby. He's hardly squeaky clean and has gotten away with plenty of pretty awful tackles and cheap shots himself (and the occasional bit of play acting for the ref). Let's not whitewash him just because of who he's needling.

Yeah nah maybe...

Farrell deserved the confrontation regardless of who delivered it. The reaction speaks volumes about Farrell's character. That's the issue.

Totally agree

Just don't forget Biggar is also a bit of a cunt

As a neutral, Biggar is much less of a cnut than Farrell... almost likeable. Whereas, unless you're an England supporter, Farrell is hard to like. Plus he doesn't excite as a player. Plus he hits people high a lot more than anyone else... or so it seems.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Bigger dives more. They disappoint in different ways

[Brazil]

Yeah nah maybe...

Farrell deserved the confrontation regardless of who delivered it. The reaction speaks volumes about Farrell's character. That's the issue.

Totally agree

Just don't forget Biggar is also a bit of a cunt

As a neutral, Biggar is much less of a cnut than Farrell... almost likeable. Whereas, unless you're an England supporter, Farrell is hard to like. Plus he doesn't excite as a player. Plus he hits people high a lot more than anyone else... or so it seems.

I'm not sure Farrell necessarily hits people high a lot more than anyone else, but he has form for utterly losing his head when things don't go his way, and compensating by making a reckless and dangerous hit. It's amusing in a way because it belies the myth that he's this great leader from the front who can marshal and inspire his troops under the most trying of circumstances - his tendency is to get his team into further shit by doing dumb stuff when The Plan goes wrong, like we saw at the weekend (albeit Ford coming on was actually to England's advantage. Maybe that's Borthwick's grand strategy after all).

[pjm1]

This conversation needs more Sexton

[Slick]

Yeah nah maybe...

Farrell deserved the confrontation regardless of who delivered it. The reaction speaks volumes about Farrell's character. That's the issue.

Totally agree

Just don't forget Biggar is also a bit of a cunt

As a neutral, Biggar is much less of a cnut than Farrell... almost likeable. Whereas, unless you're an England supporter, Farrell is hard to like. Plus he doesn't excite as a player. Plus he hits people high a lot more than anyone else... or so it seems.

As a neutral, I disagree. I like Farrell, not his tackling, but as a player and a person. Biggar seems like an absolutely brilliant guy off the pitch but a total dick on it - I can relate to that...

[Grandpa]

Totally agree

Just don't forget Biggar is also a bit of a cunt

As a neutral, Biggar is much less of a cnut than Farrell... almost likeable. Whereas, unless you're an England supporter, Farrell is hard to like. Plus he doesn't excite as a player. Plus he hits people high a lot more than anyone else... or so it seems.

As a neutral, I disagree. I like Farrell, not his tackling, but as a player and a person. Biggar seems like an absolutely brilliant guy off the pitch but a total dick on it - I can relate to that...

Not sure what there is to like about Farrell. OK, English isn't his first language, but even allowing for that I find it difficult to like him... as a player... he's the antithesis of what I like... but then I loved Carlos Spencer and hated Grant Fox...

[Grandpa]

This conversation needs more Sexton

Farrell does not deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as Sexton...

[Grandpa]

Totally agree

Just don't forget Biggar is also a bit of a cunt

As a neutral, Biggar is much less of a cnut than Farrell... almost likeable. Whereas, unless you're an England supporter, Farrell is hard to like. Plus he doesn't excite as a player. Plus he hits people high a lot more than anyone else... or so it seems.

I'm not sure Farrell necessarily hits people high a lot more than anyone else, but he has form for utterly losing his head when things don't go his way, and compensating by making a reckless and dangerous hit. It's amusing in a way because it belies the myth that he's this great leader from the front who can marshal and inspire his troops under the most trying of circumstances - his tendency is to get his team into further shit by doing dumb stuff when The Plan goes wrong, like we saw at the weekend (albeit Ford coming on was actually to England's advantage. Maybe that's Borthwick's grand strategy after all).

Not many players have multiple high hits compilations on YouTube!

[JM2K6]

This conversation needs more Sexton

The stroppy slow fly halves union is a broad church

[Torquemada 1420]

This conversation needs more Sexton

The stroppy slow fly halves union is a broad church

Appear to have swiped the mantle from stroppy, slow SHs.

[handyman]

Predictions for how many games he will be banned for, if any?

[Paddington Bear]

As a neutral, Biggar is much less of a cnut than Farrell... almost likeable. Whereas, unless you're an England supporter, Farrell is hard to like. Plus he doesn't excite as a player. Plus he hits people high a lot more than anyone else... or so it seems.

As a neutral, I disagree. I like Farrell, not his tackling, but as a player and a person. Biggar seems like an absolutely brilliant guy off the pitch but a total dick on it - I can relate to that...

Not sure what there is to like about Farrell. OK, English isn't his first language, but even allowing for that I find it difficult to like him... as a player... he's the antithesis of what I like... but then I loved Carlos Spencer and hated Grant Fox...

There's plenty to like about Farrell just as it's possible to utterly despair at his failure to clean up his tackle technique. That a rugby player acts like a dick on the pitch really isn't unique to him in any manner, the extent people go to to pretend he is is pretty amusing.

[Tichtheid]

As a neutral, I disagree. I like Farrell, not his tackling, but as a player and a person. Biggar seems like an absolutely brilliant guy off the pitch but a total dick on it - I can relate to that...

Not sure what there is to like about Farrell. OK, English isn't his first language, but even allowing for that I find it difficult to like him... as a player... he's the antithesis of what I like... but then I loved Carlos Spencer and hated Grant Fox...

There's plenty to like about Farrell just as it's possible to utterly despair at his failure to clean up his tackle technique. That a rugby player acts like a dick on the pitch really isn't unique to him in any manner, the extent people go to to pretend he is is pretty amusing.

I like Farrell as a player and he's a lot more expansive than he seems to get credit for, less so for England I think but that is down to how the coaches have wanted to play.

You're spot on about the tackle technique though, but to be fair he's had a very easy ride on it over the years so some of the blame lies at the feet of the referees who have let it go, plus the citing commissioners and tribunal panels, rugby has always been about what you can get away with.

[clydecloggie]

Predictions for how many games he will be banned for, if any?

Repeat offender, no deduction for tackle school, no mitigation - it should be 6 weeks, i.e. 2 warm-ups plus the entire pool phase of the RWC.

They'll find mitigation in George pushing Basham into Farrell's path, Farrell wasn't actually planning to tackle and just braced for the collision.

Verdict: 3 weeks.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Predictions for how many games he will be banned for, if any?

Repeat offender, no deduction for tackle school, no mitigation - it should be 6 weeks, i.e. 2 warm-ups plus the entire pool phase of the RWC.

They'll find mitigation in George pushing Basham into Farrell's path, Farrell wasn't actually planning to tackle and just braced for the collision.

Verdict: 3 weeks.

I just braced for collision by actively sticking my shoulder into the victims head will prove a tricky sell, unless the panel know in advance he's not to miss any WC games.

[Paddington Bear]

Not sure what there is to like about Farrell. OK, English isn't his first language, but even allowing for that I find it difficult to like him... as a player... he's the antithesis of what I like... but then I loved Carlos Spencer and hated Grant Fox...

There's plenty to like about Farrell just as it's possible to utterly despair at his failure to clean up his tackle technique. That a rugby player acts like a dick on the pitch really isn't unique to him in any manner, the extent people go to to pretend he is is pretty amusing.

I like Farrell as a player and he's a lot more expansive than he seems to get credit for, less so for England I think but that is down to how the coaches have wanted to play.

You're spot on about the tackle technique though, but to be fair he's had a very easy ride on it over the years so some of the blame lies at the feet of the referees who have let it go, plus the citing commissioners and tribunal panels, rugby has always been about what you can get away with.

Agree with all of this.

England seem to totally ignore how Saracens attack (an attack built around him), for whom he tore apart most of the Premiership. It's radically different to what we're expecting him to do in an England shirt.
He's a 'victim' (please everyone note the inverted commas) of TMO intervention more recently, in the same manner as the ABs haven't got away with half of what they used to even a decade ago. I can't see a ban of less than 4 games.

[sockwithaticket]

Predictions for how many games he will be banned for, if any?

Repeat offender, no deduction for tackle school, no mitigation - it should be 6 weeks, i.e. 2 warm-ups plus the entire pool phase of the RWC.

They'll find mitigation in George pushing Basham into Farrell's path, Farrell wasn't actually planning to tackle and just braced for the collision.

Verdict: 3 weeks.

While it's true some players try and argue their way out of reds, I don't think there's enough there for it to be a viable strategy.

The infographic from his last ban:



Unless he has a tantrum in the hearing or challenges the card being red, you'd think he'll be eligible for the same three mitigation criteria he was last time.

I would say that repeat offender in the aggravation column should have added an extra week last time, so it definitely should now.

Consequently, I reckon he'll be looking at 4 - 5 weeks. It should be more, but the disciplinary process is a joke.

[pjm1]

That's a good infographic. I'd argue the "need for deterrent" box now should be ticked - he's been given opportunity to fix it and failed to do so. I'd like to see 6-2+2 on principle but suspect we'll get 6-2+1, especially with the special mitigating circumstances of "RWC approaching".

[Bainbridge III]

Predictions for how many games he will be banned for, if any?

Repeat offender, no deduction for tackle school, no mitigation - it should be 6 weeks, i.e. 2 warm-ups plus the entire pool phase of the RWC.

They'll find mitigation in George pushing Basham into Farrell's path, Farrell wasn't actually planning to tackle and just braced for the collision.

Verdict: 3 weeks.

While it's true some players try and argue their way out of reds, I don't think there's enough there for it to be a viable strategy.

The infographic from his last ban:



Unless he has a tantrum in the hearing or challenges the card being red, you'd think he'll be eligible for the same three mitigation criteria he was last time.

I would say that repeat offender in the aggravation column should have added an extra week last time, so it definitely should now.

Consequently, I reckon he'll be looking at 4 - 5 weeks. It should be more, but the disciplinary process is a joke.

Logically (ha yeh) his entry point starts at 6 weeks minimum for this but there is still an initial discussion and a look at the laws to see if the entry point should be higher, this discussion will include the injury to the player, impact on the match (created handbags etc), For his last ban there was no injury to the player (no HIA during the match, player completed the game, post-match HIA was passed). So he is likely to be looking at being bumped up in to the High end, starting at 10 as a minimum (this is what happened for his 2020 citing against wasps, his most recent citing had no injury to the player recorded). Add in that he was completely upright then I cant see how he starts at less than 10 weeks.

Looking at mitigation he wont be able to claim he was immediately sorry and apologized as I assume he didn't have time to say sorry as he was arguing with Biggar and then left the field, so remorse and timing of remorse cant be too strong an argument for mitigation. He can get time off for being remorseful and respectful during the hearing, etc. So as he cant get the full 50% reduction available for mitigation, lets say he can get 30% maximum, this takes him to 7 weeks.

Aggravation - clearly should get a % increase this time around for repeat offences, lets say 20% of the 10 weeks, so he is now on 9 weeks. Then they have to decide if this falls within any area world rugby have decided there is a need for deterrent for repeat offending - I assume this means that if they have told unions round the world that they need to have a focus on stopping head injuries then you can add further weeks here, but it seems to have been left as blank on Farrells last judgement, however that wasn't an upright tackle and it was the RFU making the judgments - so who knows?

My bet based on zero expertise is 9-11 weeks minimum.

https://www.englandrugby.com/dxdam/5b/5 ... final).pdf

https://www.englandrugby.com/dxdam/b1/b ... final).pdf

[sockwithaticket]

That's a good infographic. I'd argue the "need for deterrent" box now should be ticked - he's been given opportunity to fix it and failed to do so. I'd like to see 6-2+2 on principle but suspect we'll get 6-2+1, especially with the special mitigating circumstances of "RWC approaching".

While there are many, many things we can criticise the RFU for, they actually do a really good job of making disciplinary outcomes available even for incidents at the amateur and semi-pro level.

https://www.englandrugby.com/governance ... /2022-2023

Click on the hyperlinks for any given case and you can read the full judgement, any offences from the Championship and up get an infographic too. Given how clear and easily accessible these are, the level of discussion around high profile incidents in the rugby media is lamentable.



If I was on the panel I'd be saying at least one of the other two Aggravation boxes ought to be ticked because he's not just a recidivist, but a serial one. Thus, max ban for his offence (6) + an extra week or two would seem apt. However, as suggested, a supposedly key England player with a looming World Cup is probably not going to be on the receiving end of that.

[Simian]

I’ll be very very surprised if he gets more than five weeks and extremely disappointed if it’s much less.

[clydecloggie]

That's a good infographic. I'd argue the "need for deterrent" box now should be ticked - he's been given opportunity to fix it and failed to do so. I'd like to see 6-2+2 on principle but suspect we'll get 6-2+1, especially with the special mitigating circumstances of "RWC approaching".

While there are many, many things we can criticise the RFU for, they actually do a really good job of making disciplinary outcomes available even for incidents at the amateur and semi-pro level.

https://www.englandrugby.com/governance ... /2022-2023

Click on the hyperlinks for any given case and you can read the full judgement, any offences from the Championship and up get an infographic too. Given how clear and easily accessible these are, the level of discussion around high profile incidents in the rugby media is lamentable.



If I was on the panel I'd be saying at least one of the other two Aggravation boxes ought to be ticked because he's not just a recidivist, but a serial one. Thus, max ban for his offence (6) + an extra week or two would seem apt. However, as suggested, a supposedly key England player with a looming World Cup is probably not going to be on the receiving end of that.

It won't be an RFU panel though, but an international one.

Having said that, the same sort of panel let serial offender Zander Fagerson off with effectively a 2-week ban.

[Jock42]

Can they still be selected if the ban runs into the RWC starting?

[Torquemada 1420]

England seem to totally ignore how Saracens attack (an attack built around him), for whom he tore apart most of the Premiership. It's radically different to what we're expecting him to do in an England shirt.

Whilst I have some sympathy with that viewpoint, the standard of rugby in the Prem doesn't equate to intl level.

[Torquemada 1420]

Predictions for how many games he will be banned for, if any?

Repeat offender, no deduction for tackle school, no mitigation - it should be 6 weeks, i.e. 2 warm-ups plus the entire pool phase of the RWC.

They'll find mitigation in George pushing Basham into Farrell's path, Farrell wasn't actually planning to tackle and just braced for the collision.

Verdict: 3 weeks.

While it's true some players try and argue their way out of reds, I don't think there's enough there for it to be a viable strategy.

The infographic from his last ban:



Unless he has a tantrum in the hearing or challenges the card being red, you'd think he'll be eligible for the same three mitigation criteria he was last time.

I would say that repeat offender in the aggravation column should have added an extra week last time, so it definitely should now.

Consequently, I reckon he'll be looking at 4 - 5 weeks. It should be more, but the disciplinary process is a joke.

The INTENTIONAL bit is the irksome one. What TF else is it when he refuses to change his technique?

[Torquemada 1420]

Can they still be selected if the ban runs into the RWC starting?

Yes. But it takes up a squad slot.

We had this debate earlier. If replacements are allowed for injury, I can see Eng dropping him for a specialist FH who will mysteriously get injured just after Farrell's ban ends.

{EDIT} TBC, this is not a dig at Eng per se but at how the rules (at least the spirit of them) are being bent to make a mockery of so called judicial systems. The Fagerson ban is a farce. Sexton playing behind closed doors another. So we can expect every side to behave in this way given any opportunity.

[Jock42]

Can they still be selected if the ban runs into the RWC starting?

Yes. But it takes up a squad slot.

We had this debate earlier. If replacements are allowed for injury, I can see Eng dropping him for a specialist FH who will mysteriously get injured just after Farrell's ban ends.

Cheers. I didn't think that was the case.

[JM2K6]

England seem to totally ignore how Saracens attack (an attack built around him), for whom he tore apart most of the Premiership. It's radically different to what we're expecting him to do in an England shirt.

Whilst I have some sympathy with that viewpoint, the standard of rugby in the Prem doesn't equate to intl level.

Also, while it's certainly true that Saracens play a different style now, for the majority of Farrell's career the Saracens way and the England way have been largely aligned but he's never managed to produce at 10 for England the way he does for Saracens, some high profile one offs aside. His best and his most consistent periods for England have all been at 12.

[sockwithaticket]

That's a good infographic. I'd argue the "need for deterrent" box now should be ticked - he's been given opportunity to fix it and failed to do so. I'd like to see 6-2+2 on principle but suspect we'll get 6-2+1, especially with the special mitigating circumstances of "RWC approaching".

While there are many, many things we can criticise the RFU for, they actually do a really good job of making disciplinary outcomes available even for incidents at the amateur and semi-pro level.

https://www.englandrugby.com/governance ... /2022-2023

Click on the hyperlinks for any given case and you can read the full judgement, any offences from the Championship and up get an infographic too. Given how clear and easily accessible these are, the level of discussion around high profile incidents in the rugby media is lamentable.



If I was on the panel I'd be saying at least one of the other two Aggravation boxes ought to be ticked because he's not just a recidivist, but a serial one. Thus, max ban for his offence (6) + an extra week or two would seem apt. However, as suggested, a supposedly key England player with a looming World Cup is probably not going to be on the receiving end of that.

It won't be an RFU panel though, but an international one.

Having said that, the same sort of panel let serial offender Zander Fagerson off with effectively a 2-week ban.

I suspect all those connected to World Rugby buy into the idea that the World Cup will be more successful the more first team players for the big nations are available. It shouldn't have an impact on disciplinary proceedings, but I won't hold my breath.

[JM2K6]

As a neutral, I disagree. I like Farrell, not his tackling, but as a player and a person. Biggar seems like an absolutely brilliant guy off the pitch but a total dick on it - I can relate to that...

Not sure what there is to like about Farrell. OK, English isn't his first language, but even allowing for that I find it difficult to like him... as a player... he's the antithesis of what I like... but then I loved Carlos Spencer and hated Grant Fox...

There's plenty to like about Farrell just as it's possible to utterly despair at his failure to clean up his tackle technique. That a rugby player acts like a dick on the pitch really isn't unique to him in any manner, the extent people go to to pretend he is is pretty amusing.

Is anyone claiming he's unique? Repeat offenders for all kinds of stuff are disliked by people, it's not like it means they can't dislike other players at the same time for similar or even entirely different reasons.

[Torquemada 1420]

England seem to totally ignore how Saracens attack (an attack built around him), for whom he tore apart most of the Premiership. It's radically different to what we're expecting him to do in an England shirt.

Whilst I have some sympathy with that viewpoint, the standard of rugby in the Prem doesn't equate to intl level.

Also, while it's certainly true that Saracens play a different style now, for the majority of Farrell's career the Saracens way and the England way have been largely aligned but he's never managed to produce at 10 for England the way he does for Saracens, some high profile one offs aside. His best and his most consistent periods for England have all been at 12.

My feeling too but I've not watched much Prem in recent years and so club appearances limited to HEC.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

And if England got the relative forward dominance Sarries often enjoy who'd be best placed to exploit that? It's not like Ford and Smith would object to being on the front foot and only Farrell could manage such a game

[Simian]

England seem to totally ignore how Saracens attack (an attack built around him), for whom he tore apart most of the Premiership. It's radically different to what we're expecting him to do in an England shirt.

Whilst I have some sympathy with that viewpoint, the standard of rugby in the Prem doesn't equate to intl level.

Also, while it's certainly true that Saracens play a different style now, for the majority of Farrell's career the Saracens way and the England way have been largely aligned but he's never managed to produce at 10 for England the way he does for Saracens, some high profile one offs aside. His best and his most consistent periods for England have all been at 12.

I agree. But I also think this says more about how good ford is than how good Farrell is, tbh.

[JM2K6]

Whilst I have some sympathy with that viewpoint, the standard of rugby in the Prem doesn't equate to intl level.

Also, while it's certainly true that Saracens play a different style now, for the majority of Farrell's career the Saracens way and the England way have been largely aligned but he's never managed to produce at 10 for England the way he does for Saracens, some high profile one offs aside. His best and his most consistent periods for England have all been at 12.

I agree. But I also think this says more about how good ford is than how good Farrell is, tbh.

Yes and no. Certainly Ford has shunted Farrell to 12 a few times over the years, but Farrell's failings at ten can be viewed over time on their own. It's remarkable how much a player who clearly has a very high ceiling in that position for his club and who has had over forty starts at ten for England has produced sub par personal performances. His decision making and execution are both frequently flawed, far beyond what you'd expect from a storied international, let alone with with his legend and status.

[inactionman]

Also, while it's certainly true that Saracens play a different style now, for the majority of Farrell's career the Saracens way and the England way have been largely aligned but he's never managed to produce at 10 for England the way he does for Saracens, some high profile one offs aside. His best and his most consistent periods for England have all been at 12.

I agree. But I also think this says more about how good ford is than how good Farrell is, tbh.

Yes and no. Certainly Ford has shunted Farrell to 12 a few times over the years, but Farrell's failings at ten can be viewed over time on their own. It's remarkable how much a player who clearly has a very high ceiling in that position for his club and who has had over forty starts at ten for England has produced sub par personal performances. His decision making and execution are both frequently flawed, far beyond what you'd expect from a storied international, let alone with with his legend and status.

There's been a few times watching Farrell at 10 where it seems the opposition are finding it straightforward to read him - Russell's intercept during the madness in the 38-all Test being one example (of course, it came to Farrell straight from Youngs, but Russell read it from miles out, and Farrell should have taken advantage of a defender flying out of the line).

That's just one example btw, but is perhaps the most egregious I can think of.

eta: Ford has the ability to play what's in front of him more, which isn't a direct criticism of Farrell, more a recognition of Ford's skill.

[Simian]

Also, while it's certainly true that Saracens play a different style now, for the majority of Farrell's career the Saracens way and the England way have been largely aligned but he's never managed to produce at 10 for England the way he does for Saracens, some high profile one offs aside. His best and his most consistent periods for England have all been at 12.

I agree. But I also think this says more about how good ford is than how good Farrell is, tbh.

Yes and no. Certainly Ford has shunted Farrell to 12 a few times over the years, but Farrell's failings at ten can be viewed over time on their own. It's remarkable how much a player who clearly has a very high ceiling in that position for his club and who has had over forty starts at ten for England has produced sub par personal performances. His decision making and execution are both frequently flawed, far beyond what you'd expect from a storied international, let alone with with his legend and status.

Yeah, that’s totally fair.

Tbh, I rushed to make the post you replied to because I think Ford is a super classy player.

[JM2K6]

I agree. But I also think this says more about how good ford is than how good Farrell is, tbh.

Yes and no. Certainly Ford has shunted Farrell to 12 a few times over the years, but Farrell's failings at ten can be viewed over time on their own. It's remarkable how much a player who clearly has a very high ceiling in that position for his club and who has had over forty starts at ten for England has produced sub par personal performances. His decision making and execution are both frequently flawed, far beyond what you'd expect from a storied international, let alone with with his legend and status.

Yeah, that’s totally fair.

Tbh, I rushed to make the post you replied to because I think Ford is a super classy player.

Yup, he's the best ten option for England right now. Smith can do things he can't but Ford is an all round player with a world class kicking game who can flick the switch to spark a team at international level. He's exactly what this England team is going to need right now.

I hope he doesn't play a minute of the next warm-up.

[Paddington Bear]

England seem to totally ignore how Saracens attack (an attack built around him), for whom he tore apart most of the Premiership. It's radically different to what we're expecting him to do in an England shirt.

Whilst I have some sympathy with that viewpoint, the standard of rugby in the Prem doesn't equate to intl level.

This is fine and I have some sympathy for this also. However England players essentially have to play in the Prem so not sure what else we're comparing it to which is useful, and we hear an awful lot about how one of his main competitors for the jersey tears apart Prem teams from sixth in the table, so there is as there often is with Faz a 'heads I win, tails you lose' aspect to the point. Maybe the Sarries system won't adapt to the international game but it seems odd to pick someone and ask him to do something so radically different to what works so well for him week in week out, particularly as a lot of the same guys are in the England set up (there is also an element of this being true for Smith as well, of course).

Not sure what there is to like about Farrell. OK, English isn't his first language, but even allowing for that I find it difficult to like him... as a player... he's the antithesis of what I like... but then I loved Carlos Spencer and hated Grant Fox...

There's plenty to like about Farrell just as it's possible to utterly despair at his failure to clean up his tackle technique. That a rugby player acts like a dick on the pitch really isn't unique to him in any manner, the extent people go to to pretend he is is pretty amusing.

Is anyone claiming he's unique? Repeat offenders for all kinds of stuff are disliked by people, it's not like it means they can't dislike other players at the same time for similar or even entirely different reasons.

Yeah I think Grandpa fairly clearly is