Owen Farrell citing

[AlRums]

Owen Farrell: England captain could miss Six Nations after dangerous tackle citing

England captain Owen Farrell could miss the start of the Six Nations after being cited for a dangerous tackle playing for Saracens.

www.bbc.co.uk

Owen Farrell in danger of missing Six Nations start after citing for tackle

Owen Farrell has been cited for a dangerous tackle in Saracens’ last-gasp victory over Gloucester and faces the prospect of missing the start of England’s Six Nations campaign

www.theguardian.com

 

[Jimbo]

3 week ban it is then, feels about right (based purely on this incident) maybe four would be slightly more appropriate but this was by no means the most recent bad tackle whilst a red on the day probably the lower end,
the one from Andrew Warwick resulting in Manus concussion was far worse, being Faz it all needs blowing hugely out of proportion and a witch hunt leading to a widely held view that he gets off lightly and conspiracy theories arise.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Yeah fair punishment. Tackle school is bogus though, guaranteed its video training like you have for phishing/AML in a new job.

I think the citing process itself is mostly fine, the actual punishments and how they're given and reduced needs a massive overhaul. Far too much wiggle room.

 

[BrokenWing]

Tackle school is bogus though, guaranteed its video training like you have for phishing/AML in a new job.

Chris Ashton spoke a bit about it on the Rugby Union Weekly podcast this week.

Coach had to instruct player on video of where and how to tackle, then show video of player getting technique right.

 

[ncurd]

Guys been playing professional rugby for 13 years should of been coached out by now by his regular coaches.

I don't agree with it being adjudged mid range. The tackle was high from an almost stationary position with both players only slightly crouched. Simply put nothing provides any real mitigation for it aguing to be lower. They'll always be worse hits but the question should be why on Earth did get even close to creating a red card offence mid-range and low should be more for ah you can see how this accidentally happened but not enough mitigation to bring it down to yellow.

Especially as the guy said he thought he was aiming for the chest and was nowhere near.

Actually my big complaint about this part of the citing process is there is no real explanantion to why they adjudged it to be mid-range as opposed to the other options.

I don;t think its a conspiracy though just a bad process.

 

[Reiser99]

Also as highlighted in another thread, it said impact on game - none, when if he had been red carded he couldn't have kicked the winning drop goal.

 

[Jimbo]

Actually my big complaint about this part of the citing process is there is no real explanantion to why they adjudged it to be mid-range as opposed to the other options.

I think you kind of answered your own question, I would think it was deemed mid-range as the impact wasn’t huge (almost standing start)if there both at full Tilt and that happens the impact and danger is far higher so should carry a heavier sanction.

Not for a minute am I condoning or arguing it a red but defiantly don’t see it on the top end of the spectrum.

 

[Reiser99]

So from what I've read on the BBC, the controversy is that the RFU are saying he is released for a game that normally if he wasn't banned, he wouldn't have played in so they can get the games out the way.