Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Out-of-favour England midfielder Manu Tuilagi banned for red card

(Photo by Alex Davidson/Getty Images for Sale Sharks)

Manu Tuilagi has learned his fate following last Saturday’s Gallagher Premiership red card for Sale at Northampton, the out-of-favour England midfield getting a four-game ban for his foul 14th-minute tackle on Tommy Freeman. The 31-year-old had been hoping that a good display for Sale could force him back into the England reckoning.

ADVERTISEMENT

Tuilagi was in the 29-man squad for both recent Test matches against Scotland and Italy but was surplus to requirement when Steve Borthwick eventually named his 23-man match day squads for those Guinness Six Nations games.

Instead of being included in last week’s fallow week training squad, he returned to Manchester with a view to playing for the Sharks but that plan was destroyed by the Franklin’s Gardens red card shown to him by referee Ian Tempest, who said at the time: “Do we have foul play here? Yes, we do because the arm is away from the body. It’s forearm with force, extremely dangerous to the neck area. That’s a red card.”

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

That sending-off resulted in Tuilagi being omitted from the 36-strong England squad that assembled at Pennyhill to prepare for this weekend’s round three game away to Wales and he has now learned his disciplinary fate.

An RFU statement read: “The case of Manu Tuilagi was heard today [Tuesday] by sole judicial officer Jeremy Summers. Tuilagi received a red card during the game against Northampton for reckless or dangerous play.

Related

“Tuilagi accepted foul play and received a four-match ban. This will be reduced to three weeks if the player completes the World Rugby coaching intervention programme. Tuilagi will miss the following games:

    • Feb 25: vs Exeter Chiefs;
    • Mar 5: vs Saracens;
    • Mar 12: vs London Irish;
    • Apr 1: vs Cardiff Blues – this game will be removed on successful completion of World Rugby coaching intervention programme.”

A six-week entry point was initially determined for the offence, reduced to four when mitigation was factored in. Successful completion of tackle school would make Tuilagi available for an England squad return for the final week of the Six Nations, the March 18 round five match against Ireland in Dublin. However, a Test recall is a longshot given that he was unwanted for rounds one and two and will miss now rounds three and four through suspension.

The summary of the evidence presented by Tuilagi at his hearing read: “The player unequivocally accepted the charge stating that he took full responsibility for his actions. His position was that he had mistimed the challenge having misjudged the distance between him and Northampton No14. He had anticipated that N14 would come up faster and effect a dominant hit.

ADVERTISEMENT

“In preparing for that impact he had intended to execute a lawful fend with his arm tucked close to his body. In this respect, he took the judicial officer to 0:09 on the footage where he had used a lawful fend to defend the tackle from the first defender who had attempted to stop him.

“He accepted that his arm was well away from his body and that he had made contact with N14 that had warranted a red card. The incident had happened in a dynamic situation and he had got his timing wrong. N14 was about two seconds behind where he had thought he would be in making the tackle and he had realised at the time that he had got his action badly wrong.

“He knew N14 well and would not have sought to injure him. He had apologised to N14 as he left the field having been dismissed and spoke with him again after the game. (Sale boss) Alex Sanderson submitted that the offending was clearly not in the player’s character as reflected by his record over a long career.”

The hearing outcome later read: “The player used his arm with the intention of fending off the oncoming N14. In reaching that finding, the judicial officer accepted the player’s evidence and in doing so noted that the player had lawfully effected a similar fend earlier in the play.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The judicial officer further accepted that the player had not intended to cause injury to N14 or to deliberately target his head. In the view of the judicial officer, the player’s conduct had been reckless and highly dangerous.”

  • Click here to read the full disciplinary hearing verdict
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 6 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.

145 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian? Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian?
Search