He's obviously very lucky and no doubt the panel were told he had to be at the world cup, just like sexton, so they had to find a reason to downgrade it to a yello
Astonishing decision. As written above, brings the process (and game) into disrepute.
And I write that as a previous double season ticket holder at Sarries for years (no longer as eldest step-avi plays at a decent level so we watch him).
Whether George’s contact with Basham caused him to slightly change direction, the tackle height was always head high, and Basham’s head would still have been hit from a different angle.
Let’s hope World Rugby appeal. If successful with their appeal, Farrell won’t then have the mitigation of pleading guilty, so should get at least 5-6 weeks.
I knew they would find every possible way to mitigate down from a 6-week starting point that frankly should have been increased given his previous and recent record.
Naively it never occurred to me they would think it not a red card.
I want to know what Farrell has on someone high up in Planet Rugby. How he has remained on the squad, remained as captain and then skips over this particular controversy with such ease. Am I missing something?!??
After watching the tackle in slow motion from various angles, but not knowing the rules in fine detail, I can't say whether he deserves a red card but I can say that whatever George did was irrelevant to the badness of Farrell's tackle.
0
1
That really surprises me as it was a daft tackle and he appeared to stand up into it to really smash his shoulder in the guy's face.
0
1
And it isn’t as if he doesn’t have form for this
0
1
That's his main problem. He's having a good game then he gets the red mist and does something aggressive and daft.
0
1
Again.
0
1
Interesting that George’s intervention outweighed the fact that Farrell is a serial offender when considering the mitigating circumstances.
New tactic - get teammate to push runner into Farrell and he won’t need to use his arms.
0
1
"serial offender"
2 red cards for high tackles in nearly 400 games
He's obviously very lucky and no doubt the panel were told he had to be at the world cup, just like sexton, so they had to find a reason to downgrade it to a yello
0
1
Of course being a "serial offender" only comes to length of ban, not whether an incident deserves a ban
1
1
That stinks to high heaven
1
1
Yup wot others have said, it’s an obvious red card
1
1
Complete joke. Brings the whole disciplinary process into disrepute.
0
1
Mr adjudicator - do you want to have to re-do all the promotional and branding materials because Farrell's getting banned? No, me neither.
2
1
Was it the same refs as at the Mancheater Utd game last night?
1
1
Astonishing decision. As written above, brings the process (and game) into disrepute.
And I write that as a previous double season ticket holder at Sarries for years (no longer as eldest step-avi plays at a decent level so we watch him).
A sad day for rugby.
1
1
They have opened a huge can of worms here for future lawyers to sue rugby into oblivion for catastrophic neglect imo
2
1
Oh Yeah.
1
1
Whether George’s contact with Basham caused him to slightly change direction, the tackle height was always head high, and Basham’s head would still have been hit from a different angle.
Let’s hope World Rugby appeal. If successful with their appeal, Farrell won’t then have the mitigation of pleading guilty, so should get at least 5-6 weeks.
Puhrlease.
0
1
Heh @ eeyore
2
1
I knew they would find every possible way to mitigate down from a 6-week starting point that frankly should have been increased given his previous and recent record.
Naively it never occurred to me they would think it not a red card.
A genuinely lunatic decision.
0
1
What have other players been getting for the same offence? (I’m only a casual rugby follower)
2
1
2 to 3 for 1st offence, 3 to 4 for repeat. Farrel without any question should have got 5 or 6. I am ashamed
0
1
Does anybody think World Rugby will appeal? Have read they have 48 hours to do so as this process has been under jurisdiction of 6N
0
1
I don't think so
They would have been complicit
They want Farrell and sexton at the tournament
Be interesting to see what happens if Dupont or someone equally popular does something red card worthy in the warm ups
0
1
Dupont seems to be blessed with a very calm temperament. Never seems to get antsy at all.
0
1
I want to know what Farrell has on someone high up in Planet Rugby. How he has remained on the squad, remained as captain and then skips over this particular controversy with such ease. Am I missing something?!??
0
1
Teflon northerner
We are a tuff bunch
Southerners wouldn't understand 😉
0
1
Are you really that Northern if you’re so interested in Union, tho…. 🤪
0
1
Gosh, every Pacific Islander sent off over the last couple month who got a hefty ban "pour enccourager les autres" should be quite unhappy.
Then again, they don't have white (jerseys/skin), so that's all right.
0
1
C’mon Davos, don’t try to pretend that Goole is in the north.
0
1
Heh @ stardust, my thoughts exactly. Davos is quite clearly a Home Counties armchair sports fan.
0
1
At best, a member of the prawn sandwich section.
0
1
Googles Goole
Thought you meant GAOL at first
0
1
An armchair fan who goes to 30+ sports fixtures a year
Would like to take my armchair tbf tbf. Standing up all game can hurt the back
0
1
After watching the tackle in slow motion from various angles, but not knowing the rules in fine detail, I can't say whether he deserves a red card but I can say that whatever George did was irrelevant to the badness of Farrell's tackle.
Join the discussion