Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Ellis Genge banned for dangerous tackle on England pal Tom Curry

Ellis Genge with Tom Curry post-game last Friday (Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images)

Ellis Genge will miss the remainder of the season with Bristol – but his ban for dangerously tackling Tom Curry won’t spill over into the new season with England provided he successfully completes tackle school. The England prop was cited following a collision in last Friday’s club loss to Sale in the Gallagher Premiership.

ADVERTISEMENT

His disciplinary hearing followed on Tuesday evening and it has now emerged that he must serve a three-match ban, a suspension that will be reduced to two with the World Rugby coaching intervention. Bristol have just two games remaining this season, this Saturday’s trip to Exeter followed by the May 6 finale at home to Gloucester.

That shortage of outings could have left Genge in danger of being unavailable for selection for the opening match of England’s four-game lead into the Rugby World Cup, the August 5 game away to Wales. However, completion of tackle school will clear the path for him with his country.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

A statement read: “Ellis Genge, Bristol Bears, was cited for dangerous tackling contrary to World Rugby law 9.13 for an incident during the game against Sale Sharks on April 14. The case was heard yesterday evening [Tuesday] by an independent disciplinary panel chaired by Matthew Weaver sitting with Mitch Read and Carl Bradshaw.

“Genge accepted the charge and received a three-week ban which will be reduced to two if he completes the World Rugby coaching intervention programme.”

Related

Weaver said: “Ellis Genge accepted the charge of dangerously tackling Tom Curry, contrary to World Rugby law 9.13, prior to the hearing and, as such, the panel needed to consider only the appropriate sanction.

“Having considered the incident, including viewing footage of it both in real-time and in slow motion, and it being confirmed that Tom Curry had suffered no significant injury, the panel was content that the appropriate entry point was the mandatory minimum of mid-range, being a six-week suspension from playing.

ADVERTISEMENT

“In light of his acceptance of the charge at the earliest opportunity, his apology to Tom Curry, and his previously good disciplinary record over a long career of over 150 top-level matches and 40 international matches, the panel were content to mitigate the suspension by the maximum 50 per cent, reducing the suspension to a 3-week suspension.

“Ellis Genge has confirmed his intention to participate in the World Rugby coaching intervention programme which, if he is confirmed as eligible and conditional upon him completing the programme, will reduce his suspension to two weeks, meaning that he will be unavailable for Bristol’s matches against Exeter on April 22 and against Gloucester on May 6.”

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

G
GrahamVF 22 minutes ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

"has SA actually EVER helped to develop another union to maturity like NZ has with Japan," yes - Argentina. You obviously don't know the history of Argentinian rugby. SA were touring there on long development tours in the 1950's

We continued the Junior Bok tours to the Argentine through to the early 70's

My coach at Grey High was Giepie Wentzel who toured Argentine as a fly half. He told me about how every Argentinian rugby club has pictures of Van Heerden and Danie Craven on prominent display. Yes we have developed a nation far more than NZ has done for Japan. And BTW Sa players were playing and coaching in Japan long before the Kiwis arrived. Fourie du Preez and many others were playing there 15 years ago.


"Isaac Van Heerden's reputation as an innovative coach had spread to Argentina, and he was invited to Buenos Aires to help the Pumas prepare for their first visit to South Africa in 1965.[1][2] Despite Argentina faring badly in this tour,[2] it was the start of a long and happy relationship between Van Heerden and the Pumas. Izak van Heerden took leave from his teaching post in Durban, relocated to Argentina, learnt fluent Spanish, and would revolutionise Argentine play in the late 1960s, laying the way open for great players such as Hugo Porta.[1][2] Van Heerden virtually invented the "tight loose" form of play, an area in which the Argentines would come to excel, and which would become a hallmark of their playing style. The Pumas repaid the initial debt, by beating the Junior Springboks at Ellis Park, and emerged as one of the better modern rugby nations, thanks largely to the talents of this Durban schoolmaster.[1]"


After the promise made by Junior Springbok manager JF Louw at the end of a 12-game tour to Argentina in 1959 – ‘I will do everything to ensure we invite you to tour our country’ – there were concerns about the strength of Argentinian rugby. South African Rugby Board president Danie Craven sent coach Izak van Heerden to help the Pumas prepare and they repaid the favour by beating the Junior Springboks at Ellis Park.

149 Go to comments
J
JW 6 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

149 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian? Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian?
Search