Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

RFU dismiss citing against Wallaby prop for incident 'with close friend'

(Photo by Alex Pantling/Getty Images)

The RFU have dismissed a citing against London Irish prop Oli Hoskins, who was adjudged to have illegally cleared out Gloucester prop Harry Elrington in last weekend Gallagher Premiership.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Wallabies prop had been cited for reckless or dangerous play, contrary to World Rugby Law 9.11 and the player accepted that foul play had occurred.

The panel heard how Hoskins was alleged to have executed a dangerous clearout on former teammate Elrington, although the incident didn’t get picked up by officials during the game. Elrington was alleged to have landed on his head and shoulders area as a result of the clearout.

Video Spacer

Scotland’s search for a Slam, Sir Clives’s Rebuke & The Real Paddy Power | RugbyPass Offload | Episode 20

Video Spacer

Scotland’s search for a Slam, Sir Clives’s Rebuke & The Real Paddy Power | RugbyPass Offload | Episode 20

A detailed breakdown of the incident was given in the written judgement:

“Gloucester 17 [Elrington] comes into ruck to contest ball on the floor. London Irish 3 [Oli Hoskins] arrives at the ruck to clearout Gloucester 17. Hoskins wraps his right arm around the back of G17’s neck. Hoskins left arm hooks the right leg of G17, as he hooks the right leg Hoskins lifts and twists G17. As Hoskins lifts and twists he drops his right side to the floor to initiate a roll. As Hoskins rolls and also lifts and twists G17, G17 rotates and is driven in a downward motion and lands with his head and neck taking all the weight of his body through the floor. At one point G17 body is vertical to his head and neck with all his body weight and some of LI3 body weight.”

“The footage shows G17 coming in to jackal for the ball at the ruck. LI3 engages with G17 with a view to driving him backwards. LI3’s right arm wraps around the back of G17 (but the footage shows this is across G17’s upper back and shoulders than his neck) and although the footage of the incident does not show clearly LI3’s left arm hooking G17’s right leg, the footage immediately after the incident indeed shows that LI3 had hold of G17’s right leg. However, a careful viewing of the footage shows that, as the ruck was forming, G6 [Jack Clement] goes off his feet and lands on the other side of the ruck, so that his body his next to LI3 and his legs are in front of LI3’s feet. G6 then ‘wriggles’ forward, in an attempt to get out of the way of LI3 but in doing so, his legs tangle with the feet of LI3, which causes LI3 to fall sideways. As LI3 has one arm around G17’s upper back and one arm around his right leg, he takes G17 with him in a rolling motion. G17’s head and neck makes contact with the ground before he quickly flips to a sitting position. There appears to be no effect on G17, no reaction from any players nor any reaction from the referee who is standing approximately a meter and a half away and looking directly at the ruck.”

The panel heard how the pair were in fact close friends, having  ‘played together for 5 years and G17 [Elrington] was at his wedding. They spoke during that game, the night of the game and the next day; there was no mention of this incident.’

It was also accepted that there was a low level of force in the incident.

An RFU statement reads: “The panel dismissed the citing but have placed a yellow card on the player’s disciplinary record for the incident. Hoskins is available to play immediately.”

ADVERTISEMENT
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 1 hour 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 Fissler Confidential: One England international in, one out for Bath Fissler Confidential: One England international in, one out for Bath
Search