Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Six Nations statement: Why the Owen Farrell red card was rescinded

(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

The Six Nations have issued a statement explaining the decision by an independent disciplinary hearing to free the red-carded Owen Farrell to play again with immediate effect. There were grave fears that the England skipper could be banned for up to six matches following last Saturday’s incident with Wales’ Taine Basham at Twickenham.

ADVERTISEMENT

Farrell was initially given a yellow card but was soon told while sitting in the sin bin that the sanction was being upgraded to a red card following review by the TMO bunker.

However, rather than England having to deal with their captain being unavailable for the start of their Rugby World Cup campaign on September 9 versus Argentina in Marseille, he has instead been cleared to play and is available for selection for this Saturday’s Summer Nations Series game away to Ireland in Dublin.

Video Spacer

Kiwi pundits react to Owen Farrell’s red | The Breakdown

Video Spacer

Kiwi pundits react to Owen Farrell’s red | The Breakdown

A statement following the three-and-a-half hour judicial hearing read: “England fly-half Owen Farrell appeared before an independent judicial committee via video link having received a red card for an act of foul play contrary to law 9.13 (a player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously; dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders) in the Summer Nations Series match between England and Wales on Saturday, August 12.

“The independent judicial committee consisting of Adam Casselden (SC, chair), John Langford and David Croft (all from Australia) heard the case, considering all the available evidence and submissions from the player and his representative. The player acknowledged that whilst he had committed an act of foul play, he denied that the act was worthy of a red card.

Related

“After reviewing all the evidence, questioning the player in detail and hearing submissions from the player’s representative, the committee concluded that the foul play review officer was wrong on the balance of probabilities to upgrade the yellow card issued to the player to a red card.

“The committee determined, when applying World Rugby’s head contact process, that mitigation should be applied to the high degree of danger found by the foul play review officer. The committee found that a late change in dynamics due to England No2’s interaction [Jamie George] in the contact area brought about a sudden and significant change in direction from the ball carrier.

ADVERTISEMENT

“In the committee’s opinion, this mitigation was sufficient to bring the player’s act of foul play below the red card threshold. The committee believes it is important to record that no criticism is made of the foul play review officer nor would any be warranted.

“Unlike the foul play review officer, the committee had the luxury of time to deliberate and consider, in private, the incident and the proper application of the head contact process.

“The committee believes this is in contrast to the foul play review officer, who was required to make his decision in a matter of minutes without the benefit of all the additional material including hearing from the player and his legal representative.

“On that basis, the committee did not uphold the red card and the player is free to play again immediately.”

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

61 Comments
I
Isikeli 488 days ago

Well if you going to bring a KC can the minor nations use him too paid for by World Rugby? I say get rid of this red card fiasco and introduce a reporting regime post game and penalty of course.

E
Euan 489 days ago

It was the right decision, as he was merely defending himself from a sudden direction change. Red card was ridiculous.

G
Gee 489 days ago

Corruption. Need to get the leader of the corrupt pack to front up to the rugby public and explain how this was rescinded and he has 0 match bans. He keeps doing it and getting away with it. I guarantee in the world cup you will see a shoulder charge not as bad as Farrell's and the player involved will have a multiple match ban. Do yourself a favour and watch the Farrell's shoulder tackle against the Bok Andre Esterhuizen. I've never seen anything that bad in 20 years. Went unpunished. I hope someone puts that bastard in a wheelchair.

V
Viliami 489 days ago

And Tongas star centre George Moala gets 20 weeks suspension for his red card in Tongas match against Canada over the weekend. Totally Unbelievable!!

S
Steffen 490 days ago

Absolutely ridiculous and a demonstration of selective interpretation of the Law and subsequent decision making. 😡

T
TQ 490 days ago

The decision isn’t absurd. If there is mitigation, which there is here because of the change in direction, the foul play may be downgraded to a yellow card. What everything turns on is whether or not the mitigation is sufficient - which is an entirely subjective call. But for the change in direction, Farrell wouldn’t have hit is head - so was not unreasonable to make the call they did.
The three JOs on the panel are much more experienced and in a better placed to make that subjective call than anyone here / than the mob. The problem is the judicial framework, which WR try all the time to make more of a consistent and legally robust process, but which leads to more decisions like this that offend against rugby common sense!

B
Bernard 490 days ago

The panel must be the only people on the planet who thought that George's "push" on Basham was sufficient mitigation for their decision.

J
John 490 days ago

It's beyond outrageous this thug has a history of trying to seriously injure opposition players and his record shows this this is a decision that was bought and paid for it's that simple their is no other reason for such a blatantly crass decision as this. It's idiots like this panel who are destroying our game there is absolutely no excuse for this and there is no mitigation what so ever other than to ensure this thug can play in the world cup. This has destroyed any faith that fans of this game have in its ruling body they should be all sacked.

R
Robert 490 days ago

so world rugby set the standard for this RWC.
so each and every red card dished out has to be treated as per Farrel saga - this has opened a can of WTF if you asked me...sad and disappointing...

g
giorgi 490 days ago

Oh, yes- "England No2’s interaction". Well further it will be the rain, the snow, a muddy pitch, a bird even a mosquito affecting dynamics.

Load More Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 4 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Generally disagree with what? The possibility that they would get whitewashed, or the idea they shouldn't gain access until they're good enough?


I think the first is a fairly irrelevant view, decide on the second and then worry about the first. Personally I'd have had them in a third lvl comp with all the bottom dwellers of the leagues. I liked the idea of those league clubs resting their best players, and so being able to lift their standards in the league, though, so not against the idea that T2 sides go straight into Challenge Cup, but that will be a higher level with smaller comps and I think a bit too much for them (not having followed any of their games/performances mind you).

Because I don't think that having the possibility of a team finishing outside the quarter finals to qualify automatically will be a good idea. I'd rather have a team finishing 5th in their domestic league.

fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen.


The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime.

42 Go to comments
J
JW 23 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Well I was mainly referring to my thinking about the split, which was essentially each /3 rounded up, but reliant on WCs to add buffer.


You may have been going for just a 16 team league ranking cup?


But yes, those were just ideas for how to select WCs, all very arbitrary but I think more interesting in ways than just going down a list (say like fl's) of who is next in line. Indeed in my reply to you I hinted at say the 'URC' WC spot actually being given to the Ireland pool and taken away from the Welsh pool.


It's easy to think that is excluding, and making it even harder on, a poor performing country, but this is all in context of a 18 or 20 team comp where URC (at least to those teams in the URC) got 6 places, which Wales has one side lingering around, and you'd expect should make. Imagine the spice in that 6N game with Italy, or any other of the URC members though! Everyone talks about SA joining the 6N, so not sure it will be a problem, but it would be a fairly minor one imo.


But that's a structure of the leagues were instead of thinking how to get in at the top, I started from the bottom and thought that it best those teams doing qualify for anything. Then I thought the two comps should be identical in structure. So that's were an even split comes in with creating numbers, and the 'UEFA' model you suggest using in some manner, I thought could be used for the WC's (5 in my 20 team comp) instead of those ideas of mine you pointed out.


I see Jones has waded in like his normal self when it comes to SH teams. One thing I really like about his idea is the name change to the two competitions, to Cup and Shield. Oh, and home and away matches.

42 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Yes I was the one who suggested to use a UEFA style point. And I guessed, that based on the last 5 years we should start with 6 top14, 6 URC and 4 Prem."

Yes I am aware that you suggested it, but you then went on to say that we should initially start with a balance that clearly wasn't derived from that system. I'm not a mind reader, so how was I to work out that you'd arrived at that balance by dint of completely having failed to remember the history of the competition.


"Again, I was the one suggesting that, but you didn't like the outcome of that."

I have no issues with the outcome of that, I had an issue with a completely random allocation of teams that you plucked out of thin air.

Interestingly its you who now seem to be renouncing the UEFA style points system, because you don't like the outcome of reducing URC representation.


"4 teams for Top14, URC and Prem, 3 teams for other leagues and the last winner, what do you think?"

What about 4 each + 4 to the best performing teams in last years competition not to have otherwise qualified? Or what about a UEFA style system where places are allocated to leagues on the basis of their performance in previous years' competitions?

There's no point including Black Lion if they're just going to get whitewashed every year, which I think would be a possibility. At most I'd support 1 team from the Rugby Europe Super Cup, or the Russian Championship being included. Maybe the best placed non-Israeli team and the Russian winners could play off every year for the spot? But honestly I think its best if they stay limited to the Challenge Cup for now.

42 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Barrett and Prendergast put Leinster European rivals on notice Barrett and Prendergast put Leinster European rivals on notice
Search