Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Nigel Owens explains why Fiji's Levani Botia wasn't red-carded

(Photo by Julian Finney/World Rugby via Getty Images)

Nigel Owens has given his verdict on the yellow card shown last Sunday night to Fiji back-rower Levani Botia and explained why it ultimately wasn’t deemed to be a red card offence by the TMO bunker.

ADVERTISEMENT

The score was tied at 10 points all 10 minutes into the second half in Toulouse when Botia made head-to-head contact with the ball-carrying Portuguese winger Rodrigo Marta.

Referee Luke Pearce sin-binned Botia and signalled that a foul play review would take place after the match restarted with a penalty.

Video Spacer

Rugbypass TV

Watch rugby on demand, from exclusive shows and documentaries to extended highlights from RWC 2023. Anywhere. Anytime. All for free!

Join us

Video Spacer

Rugbypass TV

Watch rugby on demand, from exclusive shows and documentaries to extended highlights from RWC 2023. Anywhere. Anytime. All for free!

Join us

In the end, Botia’s offence wasn’t seen as something that merited a red card and he returned to the field of play to see out the remainder of a match that Fiji lost 24-23 but still qualified for next Sunday’s quarter-final versus England in Marseille.

If Botia was red-carded, he potentially faced a suspension that would have ruled him out of facing the English. Instead, he is available for selection and Owens explained why in the latest episode of the Whistle Watch programme that he presents.

Related

“Fiji-Portugal, some of you are asking why this wasn’t a red card. Well, what we have first of all is does it reach the threshold of a yellow card to be sent to the bunker? Yes, it certainly does. It’s foul play, we have had head contact neck area, so it goes to the bunker to be reviewed.

“The bunker now will look at if there are any mitigating factors here that I don’t give a red card for. And yes there is. What we have is a slight step by the Portugal player which then causes the contact to be where it is.

ADVERTISEMENT

“So a good review by the bunker mitigated down from a red to a yellow because of the mitigating factor of that step by the player which then contributes to where the collision took place. And that’s what we want from the bunker, good accurate decisions.”

Owens also referenced the spider cam, the camera that overhangs the pitch that was hit by the ball during the final round of matches at the World Cup. “It happened in a couple of games over the weekend; it’s also happened to me in the past as well,” he said.

“It happened to me out in Australia-England in Sydney in 2016. I played on. I was wrong and this is why. When we have the ball touching something that is not within the field of play, touches something that is not usually there, for example the spider cam, this is what applies:

“The team last in possession, the team kicking were last in possession of the ball because the opposition haven’t gained possession of it yet, so the put-in will be to them.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The place will be actually where it hit the spider cam, a scrum down just below that because we can’t take into account where the ball may have gone next or what would have happened next.

“So quite rightly so, scrum down, scrum underneath where the ball comes off the spider cam and the team last in possession. So let’s hope the spider cam gets a bit higher from now on.”

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

J
JW 30 minutes 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.

144 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Young Highlanders tested by Jamie Joseph's preseason Jamie Joseph testing young Highlanders
Search