1
Ex-referee Nigel Owens breaks silence on Owen Farrell red
By PA
Former referee Nigel Owens insists rugby is in ābig troubleā if Owen Farrellās dangerous tackle against Wales is not viewed as a sending off offence.
ADVERTISEMENT
Farrell faces an independent disciplinary panel early next week after World Rugby appealed against the decision to downgrade his red card for a high shoulder-led challenge on Taine Basham to yellow.
Englandās captain has received impassioned support from his head coach Steve Borthwick and Ireland boss Andy Farrell, his father, amid an outcry over the original hearingās failure to issue a ban.
Owens, who oversaw 100 Tests from 2003 to 2020, believes Farrell should be punished for the tackle while warning the game of the repercussions if he is cleared once again.
āOwen Farrell is a great player who I have a huge amount of respect for,ā the Welshman told Wales Online.
āBut he has a history of making this kind of tackle, heās been punished before and perhaps got away with a couple too.
āThe referee and everybody at home watching the game would have been looking at that incident and going through their checklist.
ADVERTISEMENT
āDo we have foul play? Yes, we do. Do we have contact with the head? Yes, we do. Do we have a high degree of danger? Yes, we certainly do. Do we have mitigation? In my view, no we donāt.
āI donāt think there was any late change from Basham which Farrell could not adjust to, he was the only player contributing to the action of the tackle.
āThe key thing about mitigation here is that Farrellās actions were always illegal. No matter what happened, he was always leading with the shoulder and not making an attempt to wrap for a legal tackle ā so mitigation does not and should not play a part in the decision.
āFor me, itās a red card and whatever the judicial outcome may be, it still has to be a red card.
ADVERTISEMENT
āWe must stay strong and deal with acts of foul play. This is foul play, itās an illegal charge, itās not an accident. Heās always leading with the shoulder, heās made contact with the head and, sorry, heās got to take the consequences.
āThe important message here to everybody involved in the game is, despite whatever reasons that the judicial officers had for their decision, this was a red card and should continue to be a red card for the good of player safety and the future of the game as well.
āQuite simply, if we donāt deal with actions like this as a red card offence, then the game is going to be in big trouble moving forward.ā
Any "independent" judicial panel should never consist of three panelists from one country, it's a bad look.
I agree with everything Nigel said, nonetheless it should not become personal against Farrell. He's the one who will face the consequences of his act, I fail to see what he has done to be personally attacked by "fans".
He's not responsible for the independent commission not doing its job (or not being independent).
But he has chosen to appeal the decision. That was his choice. Pleading guilty would likely have led to a 4 week ban, now it should be 6 weeks as heās already been to tackle school
For a serial offender the punishment should be near the high point not middle or low point!
When is the appeal going to be held,before or after the RWC?
Something fishy here, even a very rudimentary narrow AI judiciary tool would have reached the same conclusion. Red all day. All day. Hello machine brain bye bye humans.
The sad thing about this incident is that World Rugby will now increase the pressure for refs and TMOs to dish out red cards during games at the world cup, and spoil the contest.
WRU always react to the media especially if it involves mother Engerland
It seems a shame that any criticism of an England player, particularly by one of the home nations, is seen as showing anti-English bias. Of course, sometimes it will be, but in Farrell's case we can all see what he did & we all know he was wrong. A bigger, braver guy would stand up & admit it, but all we have is his Dad saying how mean people are & his buddies, supported by the England-do-or-die crew, supporting dangerous play. Appalling. And I'm an England supporter.
Referees aren't the ones spoiling the contest, mate. Players committing foul play, their ill discipline...THAT spoils the contest.
Perfect summation Nigel. And great timing. Hopefully this is printed out and left on the desk of the next committee. And mailed to the three Aussies who made the last ridiculous decision.
If the rugby judiciary thinks the public don't understand the laws, they need to think again. We all have available excellent video footage of these events and can clearly see in this case, what amounts in my book to cheating or stupidity, or both. It's time to end this vendetta of disproportionate decisions dependent on who it is and who they play for. In thirty years', time when the victim of one of these tackles develops dementia, who takes responsibility for continued use of illegal tackles to the head.
But where does accountability cease. Let's go back to where IMO it starts, and that is Farrells coaches. His coaches at both club & international level know about his weakness in this area, he's given them enough examples but the problem is still not addressed except by giving him a few extra training sessions. Whoopee. He needs to be dismantled & totally rebuilt in this area & don't play him until it's corrected. He has too much form for it to just be continuously ignored. He must be too valuable a player to leave out & we'll just keep our fingers crossed for the number of penalties he will attract not to mention the disruption to the team when he's not playing through bans. England management have bigger kahuna's than me that's for sure especially in RWC year
His coaches obviously see no problem with his tackling - in fact Borthwick and even other English teammates have come out saying that its ok and thag Owen is just a passionate rugby player!!!! The attitude is endemic.
All clear and sensible. Especially given his history. George Moala on the other hand got a ten week ban. Red card inconsistencies have to be resolved.
5 week ban. It was a 10 week entry point - settled at 5
Agreed, red card and a ban etc. However, my concern is; how will the 3 idiots that reviewed the incident and came to a 'not guilty verdict be delt with?! They discredited and made a mockery of the bunker initiative with the very 1st opportunity! šš³
Well said.
Not the first time the bunker was used - Fagerson's sending off against France was. However I agree about discrediting it's use especially when the 'Panel' Say that the bunker 'didn't have enough time to look at it'! I thought that was the whole idea.
Totally agree.
And we'll see this week that 3 idiots are like buses....another 3 will be along very shortly !!
Exactly. Whereās their accountability