Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Nigel Owens gives his verdict on Tom Curry red, Jesse Kriel play-on

(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

Nigel Owens has shared his views on the two of the biggest talking points of Rugby World Cup opening weekend – the red card sanction for England back-rower Tom Curry and the play-on decision regarding Springboks centre Jesse Kriel.

ADVERTISEMENT

Curry was yellow-carded by referee Mathieu Raynal just three minutes into his team’s 27-10 Pool D win over Argentina in Marseille last Saturday night, a decision that was upgraded to a red card by the foul play review officer.

It meant that Curry missed 77 minutes of the game and he then learned on Tuesday that he has been banned for three matches – reducible to two if he successfully completes tackle school – for his incident with Pumas’ Juan Cruz Mallia.

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 contrast, while the TMO Ben Whitehouse reviewed the Kriel collision with Scotland’s Jack Dempsey in Marseille the next day as the first-half play continued, he didn’t find any footage that he reckoned the referee Angus Gardner should stop the play and take a look at on the Stade Velodrome big screen.

The match citing officer would also have had access to this footage and he decided there was no need for a post-game citing, leaving Kriel free to continue with his tournament in France without any sanction.

Related

Owens, the retired Test centurion referee, reviewed both the Curry and Kriel incidents on the latest edition of Whistle Watch, his weekly World Rugby review series, and he started with his assessment of the England red card.

“There was one big talking point that you all have been talking about so let’s have a look at the Tom Curry yellow card to the bunker and then upgraded to a red,” he began.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Now do we have foul play? Yes, we do. Do we have direct contact to the head? Yes, we do. Do we have a high degree of danger? Yes, we do. So, we are already now on all that on a red card. Are you all with me? Yes, I believe that you are.

“So what happens is this: The Argentinian player jumps in the air. He then comes down and as he comes down pretty much simultaneously there is contact of Tom Curry into the Argentinian player and we have contact with the head.

“Now it all comes down to something as simple as this: If you felt that Tom Curry was reckless and he could have done something to avoid what had happened, then we don’t have any mitigation, we have a red card.”

It was less than 24 hours later back at Stade Velodrome when the second major talking point materialised in the early stages of South Africa’s 18-3 Pool B win over Scotland.

ADVERTISEMENT

Owens said: “Another talking point from the weekend was the game between South Africa and Scotland, Jesse Kriel’s head contact in that game with a Scottish player.

“So the TMO has looked at this, so when the game is going ahead the TMO will be looking at everything in the background. Just remember the Hawkeye system he has, all the different angles, all the different views to look at his disposal to look at the game.

Related

“The game can carry on, the TMO is looking at this and then the TMO will decide if he needs to bring something to the referee’s decision to then put it up on the screen and officially look at it or he feels I can’t see anything wrong here so we won’t show the referee because there is nothing to show and then we carry on with the game.

“It is important to note as well that it wasn’t cited as well because the citing commissioner also has all the angles so there is alignment between on and off the field. So TMOs are always working in the background, The TMO in his view does not have clear evidence to show that there was actually head contact.

“So again it comes down to simply your view. If you are looking at this and you feel there was head contact, we would then enter the head contact protocol and guidelines and then we would probably end up with a red card or if you are looking at this and you were going, ‘Well, I can’t really see if there is actually is head contact’ and you don’t have evidence to say there was, then we don’t have foul play and the game carries on.

“So in the TMO’s view here he feels there is no clear evidence of head-on-head contact, that is why we played on.”

Owens’ programme also took a look at the Will Jordan yellow card in New Zealand’s Pool A loss to France in Paris and assessed a disallowed Fiji try in their dramatic Pool C defeat to Wales in Bordeaux.

  • Click here to watch the latest episode of Nigel Owens Whistle Watch
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

33 Comments
B
Bob Marler 432 days ago

Owens would make a good TMO. Maybe they should dial him in over teams?

P
Poe 432 days ago

Tactful of Nigel to avoid commenting on the Wales Fiji ref debacle.

G
Geoffrey 433 days ago

I’m afraid I can’t go with this. It takes too little account of the game situation in real time. I honestly can’t see where Curry could go as the man lands in to him with the ball. Yes he’s got into an awkward spot but only in following the game and the play.
For me a yellow because it’s the modern era but not more.

Load More Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 3 hours ago
'Passionate reunion of France and New Zealand shows Fabien Galthie is wrong to rest his stars'

Ok, managed to read the full article..

... New Zealand’s has only 14 and the professional season is all over within four months. In France, club governance is the responsibility of an independent organisation [the Ligue Nationale de Rugby or LNR] which is entirely separate from the host union [the Fédération Française de Rugby or FFR]. Down south New Zealand Rugby runs the provincial and the national game.

That is the National Provincial Championship, a competition of 14 representative union based teams run through the SH international window and only semi professional (paid only during it's running). It is run by NZR and goes for two and a half months.


Super Rugby is a competition involving 12 fully professional teams, of which 5 are of New Zealand eligibility, and another joint administered team of Pacific Island eligibility, with NZR involvement. It was a 18 week competition this year, so involved (randomly chosen I believe) extra return fixtures (2 or 3 home and away derbys), and is run by Super Rugby Pacific's own independent Board (or organisation). The teams may or may not be independently run and owned (note, this does not necessarily mean what you think of as 'privately owned').


LNR was setup by FFR and the French Government to administer the professional game in France. In New Zealand, the Players Association and Super Rugby franchises agreed last month to not setup their own governance structure for professional rugby and re-aligned themselves with New Zealand Rugby. They had been proposing to do something like the English model, I'm not sure how closely that would have been aligned to the French system but it did not sound like it would have French union executive representation on it like the LNR does.

In the shaky isles the professional pyramid tapers to a point with the almighty All Blacks. In France the feeling for country is no more important than the sense of fierce local identity spawned at myriad clubs concentrated in the southwest. Progress is achieved by a nonchalant shrug and the wide sweep of nuanced negotiation, rather than driven from the top by a single intense focus.

Yes, it is pretty much a 'representative' selection system at every level, but these union's are having to fight for their existence against the regime that is NZR, and are currently going through their own battle, just as France has recently as I understand it. A single focus, ala the French game, might not be the best outcome for rugby as a whole.


For pure theatre, it is a wonderful article so far. I prefer 'Ntamack New Zealand 2022' though.

The young Crusader still struggles to solve the puzzle posed by the shorter, more compact tight-heads at this level but he had no problem at all with Colombe.

It was interesting to listen to Manny during an interview on Maul or Nothing, he citied that after a bit of banter with the All Black's he no longer wanted one of their jersey's after the game. One of those talks was an eye to eye chat with Tamaiti Williams, there appear to be nothing between the lock and prop, just a lot of give and take. I thought TW angled in and caused Taylor to pop a few times, and that NZ were lucky to be rewarded.

f you have a forward of 6ft 8ins and 145kg, and he is not at all disturbed by a dysfunctional set-piece, you are in business.

He talked about the clarity of the leadership that helped alleviate any need for anxiety at the predicaments unfolding before him. The same cannot be said for New Zealand when they had 5 minutes left to retrieve a match winning penalty, I don't believe. Did the team in black have much of a plan at any point in the game? I don't really call an autonomous 10 vehicle they had as innovative. I think Razor needs to go back to the dealer and get a new game driver on that one.

Vaa’i is no match for his power on the ground. Even in reverse, Meafou is like a tractor motoring backwards in low gear, trampling all in its path.

Vaa'i actually stops him in his tracks. He gets what could have been a dubious 'tackle' on him?

A high-level offence will often try to identify and exploit big forwards who can be slower to reload, and therefore vulnerable to two quick plays run at them consecutively.

Yes he was just standing on his haunches wasn't he? He mentioned that in the interview, saying that not only did you just get up and back into the line to find the opposition was already set and running at you they also hit harder than anything he'd experienced in the Top 14. He was referring to New Zealands ultra-physical, burst-based Super style of course, which he was more than a bit surprised about. I don't blame him for being caught out.


He still sent the obstruction back to the repair yard though!

What wouldn’t the New Zealand rugby public give to see the likes of Mauvaka and Meafou up front..

Common now Nick, don't go there! Meafou showed his Toulouse shirt and promptly got his citizenship, New Zealand can't have him, surely?!?


As I have said before with these subjects, really enjoy your enthusiasm for their contribution on the field and I'd love to see more of their shapes running out for Vern Cotter and the like styled teams.

287 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ 'Steve Borthwick hung his troops out to dry - he should take some blame' 'Steve Borthwick hung his troops out to dry - he should take some blame'
Search