Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

What Owen Farrell said at his hearing and how the judiciary reacted

(Photo by Dan Mullan/The RFU Collection via Getty Images)

England talisman Owen Farrell has revealed that it was only on the Saracens team bus trip home from Gloucester last Friday night that he first realised that his shoulder has made contact with the chin of Jack Clement at Kingsholm.

ADVERTISEMENT

Footage of the late-game collision sparked a lively debate on BT Sport, who had broadcast the game live on UK television, but Farrell, who stayed on the pitch unsanctioned to land the match-winning drop goal with the final kick, wasn’t aware of the furore he tackle had ignited.

The written ten-page judgment issued on Wednesday following his Tuesday evening disciplinary hearing reported: “It was only when he got on the team bus to come home that he watched the clips and realised contact was made with the chin. When he realised he contacted his opponent to apologise.”

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Farrell was slapped with a four-game ban by the judicial committee but if selected by England next Monday when Steve Borthwick announces his Guinness Six Nations squad, the talisman out-half won’t miss any Test matches.

The disciplinary hearing verdict stipulated that Farrell could apply for the World Rugby coaching intervention programme which, if successfully completed, would scratch the final game of the four-match suspension.

Related

With Saracens having three matches scheduled over the coming weekends, tackle school would see the Farell suspension expire before the end of January and free him for England duty for the start of the Six Nations. The written judgment confirmed that Farrell is definitely applying for tackle school. “The player indicated his intention to apply to World Rugby to take part in the coaching intervention process. The panel agreed that he is eligible to take part.”

Describing his view of his tackle on Clement, Farrell told the disciplinary hearing: “He was expecting his opponent to run over him so he dropped his height to where he felt the tackle would be properly executed. He hinged both at the hips and at the knees. He said in hindsight he would have liked to have been a couple of inches lower.

ADVERTISEMENT

“He said a number of times that he felt he had made primary contact through the chest area and that he had made a fair tackle. He said he believed all his force went through the chest area. He said he thought it would have felt different had he put the force through the chin.

“He denied the suggestion made by the RFU that he had caused the chin to be pinned backwards by his contact. The player helpfully talked the panel through the footage and, as he did so, he explained why he felt the force went through the chest area rather than the chin.

“He felt that the contact with the chin was not significant. It was described as fleeting. He said his opponent continued to contest the ball following the tackle and then continued to play the rest of the game.”

In its findings of fact, the judicial panel stated: “The panel accepts the player believed he had primarily struck his opponent’s chest. The footage, in our view, demonstrates he was wrong.”

ADVERTISEMENT

It later added: “The panel saw no evidence that the player’s conduct in making contact with the head was intentional. It was a reckless act brought about by a misjudgment of the appropriate tackle height required in the circumstances.”

The foul tackle was given a six-week entry point and the full 50 per cent mitigation wasn’t applied in this instance. “Given the player’s previous offending, he is not eligible to receive the 50 per cent reduction for mitigation which would otherwise be available to him.

“The player has one previous matter on record from September 2020, for which he served a five-match ban for dangerous tackling, and another old matter which occurred in 2016. Given the date of the first matter, the panel concluded the player is not a repeat offender whose status warrants an increase in sanction for this reason.”

  • Click here to read the ten-page written judgment from the Owen Farrell disciplinary hearing
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

5 Comments
P
Poe 710 days ago

And the ref said. Let's not review, play on. I'm more interested in that performance review really.

Load More Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 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 Sacha Feinberg-Mngomezulu suffers new injury setback Springboks flyhalf's latest injury worry
Search