Ireland fans aren't happy with Bundee Aki ban

Following his red card against Samoa on Saturday, Ireland centre Bundee Aki has been banned for three weeks, bringing an end to his Rugby World Cup.

The Connacht back faced a lengthy hearing on Monday, and the committee decided to uphold the red card decision by referee Nic Berry, although Ireland can still appeal. This is despite the Irish Rugby Football Union’s claims that Aki did not have time to adjust his body, and that UJ Seuteni dropped his height.

However, World Rugby have said that the “committee did not accept that there was sufficient evidence of a sudden drop in the ball carrier‘s height.” Furthermore, they also said: “Although the tackle occurred quickly, the player’s tackle height was high and it was accepted he did not make a definite attempt to change his height in order to avoid the ball carrier’s head.”

In light of this decision, there has been a sizeable reaction of social media from those who simply do not understand how Aki can receive the same ban as others have in the RWC.

The tackle was dangerous, and while it is mitigated by the fact that both players were charging towards a loose ball, some do understand that it was a red card. But what seems to be confusing many people is this blanket three-week ban that has been handed out to so many players.

Like most players this RWC who have been banned for high shots to the head, Aki received a six-week ban that was reduced to three, and that is understandable as it was not the worst offence this RWC. However, compared to the three-week bans that Italian props Andrea Lovotti and Nicola Quaglio received for a tip tackle on Duane Vermeulen, it does seem strange.

While that was a different tackle, and therefore harder to compare, the USA’s John Quill equally received a three-week ban for his high tackle to Owen Farrell.

In both cases, Farrell and Vermeulen were able to play on, which opens the debate as to whether the outcome should have a bearing on the decision. While Aki’s tackle had worse effects, there was no malice, or certainly far less than the other two offences.

Conversely, the fact that England centre Piers Francis received no ban for a high tackle that was missed against USA fullback Will Hooley has also left some fans questioning the entire process.

This has been the reaction:
https://twitter.com/iancognito16/status/1183750062578585600?s=20
https://twitter.com/ZippyChuck/status/1183752131695828992?s=20
https://twitter.com/nkeegan/status/1183754242118635522?s=20
https://twitter.com/cornerback4fun/status/1183755533565612032?s=20
https://twitter.com/jimmacmillan2/status/1183755842048401408?s=20
https://twitter.com/Jakepaullogang0/status/1183760072066895872?s=20
https://twitter.com/MikeDolley/status/1183766708881940480?s=20
https://twitter.com/themikekeating/status/1183771095595401218?s=20

On reflection, this ban perhaps highlights where World Rugby went wrong when banning the Italian props. Aki’s ban seems in line with many other players who have committed dangerous tackles without malice so far this RWC. Realistically, Lovotti and Quaglio can deem themselves extremely lucky rather than Aki see himself as unlucky after this ordeal.

Even with 14 men for over 40 minutes, Ireland were too strong for Samoa at the Level-5 Stadium, as they won 47-5. They face the All Blacks in the quarter-final, but will be without their bulldozing centre.