DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 111984--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: Quinten Poulsen
Date: August 13, 2023, 7:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Is a one third reduction for not contesting a red card usual? I
would have thought one week, but I'm confident they will bend
over backwards to show leniency due to the proximity of the RWC.
#Post#: 111988--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: Bolly-Quin
Date: August 13, 2023, 9:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I hope the three-man Aussie panel remember the Lords Incident
earlier this summer when they serve him with his punishment...
#Post#: 111993--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: Yareet
Date: August 13, 2023, 10:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Quinten Poulsen link ---
>
> Is a one third reduction for not contesting a red card usual?
I would have thought one week, but I'm confident they will bend
over backwards to show leniency due to the proximity of the RWC.
>
--- End Quote ---
I thought it was normally halved for contrition.
I can therefore foresee 6 weeks, halved for admitting guilt and
a week back on for repeat offence. 4 games. And I wouldn't be
surprised if there isn't already somebody looking at an in-camp
Probables v Possibles game at Pennyhill.
#Post#: 111995--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: Quinten Poulsen
Date: August 13, 2023, 11:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I thought it was halved mostly for previous good record.
#Post#: 111996--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: Fursty
Date: August 13, 2023, 11:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
On the grounds he didn’t even attempt a proper tackle any
potential mitigation should go out of the window - it was a no
arms tackle to the head with a good line of sight (he had 10m to
line him up).
#Post#: 111999--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: Camquin
Date: August 13, 2023, 12:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It is not just a no arms tackle leading with the shoulder, it is
deliberate contact with force to the jaw. From someone with
previous, wo attended the coaching intervention only a few
months ago.
Rugby needs to cut out head injuries in order to survive.
Therefore this needs to be a long ban.
No matter how hard that is for England or Farrell.
#Post#: 112000--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: Twickersman
Date: August 13, 2023, 1:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I thought about Johnson, but that was in a different era, where
you could walk the line between offending and being legal in
terms of shoulder bages, head shots clearing rucks etc..
He has been banned at least twice for reckless tackles in the
Prem. He also should have been sent off when he tackled Andre
Esterhauizen in the Eng Vs SA game.
He should be banned for all 6 games.
Ford is your man for a kick and chase game. At least Smith might
get a go to show what he can do without the liability Farrell
knocking around
#Post#: 112001--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: poorfour
Date: August 13, 2023, 2:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It definitely merits a ban. The issue is that World Rugby has
already set a precedent with Fagerson's ban, which was for an
offence that was if anything worse as it was against a static
opponent.
Farrell should get less mitigation than Fagerson, because he's
already done tackle school, but the base ban needs to be in line
or the RWC will become a lottery.
What are the rules for replacing a banned player at the
tournament? Given how many cards we have seen in the warmups,
they could have a major bearing on the outcome.
#Post#: 112005--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: Bod
Date: August 13, 2023, 5:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Its typically "games" not "weeks"
If he doesn't get 10 games then World Rugby are not fit fot
purpose
#Post#: 112007--------------------------------------------------
Re: Any Mitigation?
DIR By: poorfour
Date: August 13, 2023, 7:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Bod link ---
>
> Its typically "games" not "weeks"
> If he doesn't get 10 games then World Rugby are not fit fot
purpose
>
--- End Quote ---
A) No it isn’t. It’s stated in weeks, but the press rapidly
convert that into how many games the player will miss.
B) What’s your justification for ten weeks relative to
Fagerson’s ban?
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 22
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page