The Roar
The Roar

The Roar

Brendan NH Fan

Roar Rookie

Joined July 2022

93.4k

Views

15

Published

3k

Comments

Published

Comments

The people who accept the charge are guilty. The people who don’t must be proven guilty. Proving people guilty is alot harder to do which is why if proven you don’t get as much of a reduction. Players saying sorry on social media and in interviews, and reaching out to the player are all cynical things to show ramose. Certain player making a silting throat gesture and then apologizing had nothing to do with being sorry but build evidence that he didn’t mean it (his hand just did it itself) so he could get a lesser or no punishment. Ether everyone is treated the same when given a punishment regardless of plea or we stick with what we have. If plea deal doesn’t affect punishment then we would see alot more of these.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

But lots of people still called it a red because they didn’t know all the mitigating factors. Where do we find the list, or do only the refs have it.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

How do we prove he had enough time to react. Good luck finding any player that in a room can stand like Farrell and then told we are going to say and go and stop and you must adjust your height to a given level. Saying someone can do it and actually showing someone can do it are two different things and with the legal team Farrell had they would of wanted it proven a player could have done it.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

I think any player with the same legal team would have got the same result. I would guess its not hard to find cases in SR where it was given wrongly as a yellow and then the defense just saying like in this case where ref x and citing comissioner y deemed it was a yellow why were they wrong. Or even lets look at Farrells SA tackle and lets look at this tackle. How was the ref and citing person correct then but its not ok now, what rule changed. Players plead guilty most of the time so these things don’t come up.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Ask any none English speaking country how they feel playing English speaking teams with all the ref communication in English while only about 2-3 of your player speak some English. When you are in a ruck and the ref is going blah, blah blah is he saying use it or hands off.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Welcome to professional sport, same happens in soccer. Also because rugby is English speaking centric it affects the process too. Getting Farrell who is private school educated and has English as his native language reciting pre-learned statements, and supported by a team of English speaking people. Compare that to a Tongan player trying to explain himself in another language just to his defense team let alone the panel. Other issue is did the Tongan accept the charge (most players do and only look to get the sentence reduced) or like Farrell did he accept a yellow card offence but not the red card offence which mean the prosecution had to prove it was red not yellow and the defense just has to say but that is a yellow as per X matches.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Was he sent off for an illegal tackle or a legal tackle that hit the player in the head. It might not matter to us but if he was not charged with an illegal tackle he can’t be judged on it. If there is no mention of an illegal tackle in the match reports then they can’t bring it up at the citing hearing. In Law these things matter but to us fans they don’t.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

So what you are saying is that an English man was able to influence Ozzies and RA even though they don’t like him. Not that SANZAR and SR are alot more lax and so getting a panel made up of SR people was much better than getting and EPCR panel. How was SR panel with handing out punishment for head contact, heard plenty on here that certain tackles were not red in SR that would have been in Europe which says the panel’s background had more to do with it than Farrell being English.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Farrell normally swings his left arm around. Again its fine to say he did or didn’t do something but try explain what that means to a lawyer that can be backed up by the wording of the law. If he used no arms was he sent off for a no arms tackle to the head or was it a tackle to the head that they felt had no mitigation. Refs often given different reasons to the player when sending them off but at the citing hearing that becomes very important. We don’t know what the bunker official said to the ref to have it upgraded and I doubt it was a no arms tackle so he can’t then be tried for that.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

But how do you prove a lawyer wrong when he says the player was bent and the law says if the player is bent it is mitigating. If the prosecution says he wasn’t bent enough good luck proving that in the law.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

True that is not how the law is applied but it is not how it is written and lawyers look at the words written when it suits them and how it is applied when it suits them. Law says bent at the hips, that would be part of the defense in the mitigation. Farrell didn’t deny hitting the player in the head but if mitigation was fairly taken into account. He wraps with one hand so it is not a no arms tackle. Don’t agree with the decision but lawyers will use the spirit or the letter pending on what suits them.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Great way to make the sport a joke. Did we do the same when Barrett got off kicking a player in the head on a technicality.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Do we know they submitted a written report that says I looked at clip A and felt this, then I watched Clip B and I felt this etc. We have all that with the on field decision that use to take 5 mins that could all recorded and easily shown it was done. Saying I looked at all the angels and felt that there was not mitigating factors as I don’t believe the attacking player changed direction or height is just not the same.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Because he did nothing against the law. Touching an opposition play is not a penalty. If a player stands and never moves he will still effect the running of the player, as player try stay away from the opposition.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Probably find they are part of the SR panel that has been more lax on head shots when it’s come to giving out punishments. We don’t know what the lawyer argued so can’t say if they were wrong to agree with him.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

He was sent off and his team had to play without him so not nothing. I’d rather be hit in the head than dropped on my head which is why tip tackles have been banded along time and why the punishment is often longer.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Sexton agreed to some things but not others, much like farrell. It was not during the game and it was not in public. Coaches and players don’t get bans for question refs post game in interviews that everyone can see, they just get fines. On sexton the report would have been submitted within 48 hours by the match officials, normally a citing must be done within 48-72 hours after a match which was not followed in the case. Sexton’s legal team and EPCR came to an agreement of the punishment but if it was appealled to the Court of arbitration or WR he probable would have won based on WR citing rules. Or he could have taken them to court and in the 6 months it would have taken to be heard the WC would be over

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Did he plead guilty. Farrell like Barrett with the kick to the head both refused to accept it was a red card. Too many players take a guilty plea, and the ones that don’t are often poorly defended themselves saying the ref was wrong but not being able to say why. If someone pleads guilty it’s their own fault they get a ban.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

After NZ v Ireland #3 everyone was saying Porter should have been sent off even though the ref at the time specifically said why it was not a red. People didn’t care. WR came out and confirmed that a player standing still does not have to drop his height so now we all know. WR will give a ruling on why this has happened and what makes it different from other situations. We will then know going forward. There is clearly something Farrell does that gets him around the rules as its not the first time this has come up.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Did he agree to leading with the shoulder into the head or did he agree he hit with the shoulder. Two very different things. Rule says you must wrap but wraps don’t have to be two hands. If we are saying that shoulders as first point of contact is illegal then alot more players should be punished, the illegal part is a no arms tackle. Why did farrell feel there was mitigating circumstances. Knee to the head is normally a red but in 2011 it wasn’t. Things need to be seen in 360 not just the moment of contact

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Blame the Ozzies, wasn’t Bill who picked the panel weeks ago that was going to review the any citing. We have heard for months that SR was much more relax on head contact so maybe that’s why they didn’t apply NH standards to head shots when on the panel.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

Player needs to be bend at the hip. Being bent 1% is still bent at the hip. Lawyer is not looking for obvious bent just that Farrell as not perfectly upright.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

It’s how all professional sport is. It’s why business men are better at running rugby clubs than rugby officials. Court of arbitration is full of cases like this. Rugby will know its made it as a professional sport when it gets cases there

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

If no direction change he hits him on his right side and misses his head.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today

It’s fine to say there is no mitigation but if asked to justify that statement by a lawyer could you do it. We all have our views but few would stand up to what Farrell legal team would have put the process through.

'Mockery', 'broken game', 'laughing stock': Rugby rages as red card reversal clears Owen Farrell for World Cup

View Comment
Rugby
 
Today
Older Comments
close