Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Nigel Owens has taken issue with Kennedy Simon yellow card call

(Photo by Hannah Peters/World Rugby via Getty Images)

Test centurion referee Nigel Owens has called into question the decision to only yellow card Kennedy Simon for her tackle on England’s Abby Dow during last Saturday’s World Cup final win by the Black Ferns. New Zealand ran out 34-31 winners in a splendid Eden Park final, England eventually giving second best after playing for more than an hour with just 14 players.

ADVERTISEMENT

Winger Lydia Thompson was red-carded on 18 minutes for her tackle which put the World Cup record try-scorer, Portia Woodman, out of the final. Owens had no issue with that sending off, describing it as a straightforward decision.

However, Owens took issue with the 65th-minute decision by referee Hollie Davidson to only yellow card Black Ferns replacement Simon for her collision with Dow, who was left requiring a HIA.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

It meant that the Black Ferns were able to see out the closing minutes of the knife-edge match with the full complement of players following the ten-minute sin-binning. Speaking on the latest edition of his Whistle Watch programme, Owens said: “England-New Zealand in the World Cup, what a great final. Congratulations to everyone involved.

“Quite a clear straightforward one here. Thompson goes in upright, there is no attempt to sort of go down low and make a tackle. She goes in upright, makes contact with the head, then it becomes direct contact to the head. It is dangerous play and it is a red card. This is why we want players to try and get in low.

Related

“Another one in the England-New Zealand game which has been a talking point a little bit was the Simon yellow card for the head contact as well. Now if you were looking at consistency we are probably looking at a red card here. Yes, there well could be contact with the shoulder first but there is still head-on-head contact which is at force and is dangerous, so this as well should be a red card.”

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

12 Comments
S
Shayne 764 days ago

Red cards for accuracy mistakes is not fair to fans or players, costs a lot of money to follow teams only to hope some accident doesn't ruin it. Change the rules now before next year, won't hold my breath.

J
Johnny 764 days ago

All we hear from England is "If we had 14 players, we would have won". Yes, and if my Nona had balls, she'd be my papa.
Seriously, If Portia Woodman had not been assaulted, she would have scored a few tries.
FFS.
Flowing rugby v boring maul?
I know what I prefer.

P
Pecos 765 days ago

As you say Nigel, the impact was first to the shoulder which according to current law is mitigation. So, yellow, not red. However you're wrong about secondary head to head contact at force. Why? Because Dow passed her HIA & rejoined the game. This would not be likely if she was belted in the head at force as you say, by the much bigger player, Simon.

Consistency? Woodman was knocked out & 24hrs later still couldn't remember much of the final. Her head issues from this disgusting head attack are ongoing. To label these incidences with vastly different outcomes as both red cards in the name of "consistency" is ridiculous.

T
Tomasi 765 days ago

I think the yellow was sufficient, Thompson's tackle was upright and borderline late, Simon's was dipping and hit the shoulder. I think a red would've been a bit harsh

J
Jmann 765 days ago

The bigger issue is the mere existence of RCs for accidental head clashes and the fact that they aren't just 15-20 minutes. Eventually WR will copy the SH and introduce more sensible sanctions. All it will take is for England to suffer a few more big losses from RC for them to change their stance.

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
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 Leinster player ratings vs Connacht | 2024/25 URC Leinster player ratings vs Connacht | 2024/25 URC
Search