Premiership Rugby 19/20 - Rd 18

[Scotty]

Pretty sure Baxter has already pointed it out that it's going to make things incredibly difficult.

Prob just put out a team of young players and save everyone for Europe. I think Chiefs can afford to drop 1 game in the prem

 

[Reiser99]

Ah sorry. The article was about next years Champions Cup, not this years.

Baxter fears England will become next season's sick man of Europe

Exeter boss Rob Baxter claims English clubs won't be at full strength for 2020/21 Champions Cup pool games due to relentless Test and Premiership schedules.

www.rugbypass.com

 

[BPM]

What sort of ban do we expect Faz to get? High swinging arm to the head with force and no mittigating factors.

So ford faz is out.

Who do we expect to be FHs? If we took 3

Ford
Cips?(or is it pointless taking him)
Smith/Umaga

Mid range ban is 12 weeks. I can't see him getting away with much less but as it's golden boy Farrell, he might do.

Either wasps, he'll definitely miss the final 6N game against Italy and at least some of the '8 Nations' tournament if it goes ahead.

Personally, I'd go for Ford, Smith and Simmonds but I wouldn't be overly disappointed if Umaga gets picked.

Sheedy could be a wild card. He's England qualified and is playing well and there must be at least some degree of interest given he was picked for the squad to play the Barbarians last summer.

In a way, Farrell being out does us a bit of a favour as it forces us to look at other options at 12. I'd expect to see Tuilagi there as he's now playing almost exclusively as a 12 for Sale.

Other than that, maybe Redpath could get a look in after a good start to his Bath career and regular game time.

 

[Reiser99]

Just seen the Farrell tackle for the first time. It's atrocious. Yes Atkinson slightly bent his knee, but not enough that Farrell would have hit lower than shoulder height. His tackling has been a risk for a while, so it was only a matter of time really.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Mid range ban is 12 weeks. I can't see him getting away with much less but as it's golden boy Farrell, he might do.

Journos reckon he'll get 6 weeks reduced to 3,

For me I'd say 8 - I hate hate HATE reductions for good behaviour/saying sorry etc.

 

[Reiser99]

Journos reckon he'll get 6 weeks reduced to 3,

For me I'd say 8 - I hate hate HATE reductions for good behaviour/saying sorry etc.

I was going to write surely he's got a record, but as far as I can see on RugbyPass he's only had 2 yellow cards previously for Saracens and none for England. I know he's gotten away with some tackles, but that still doesn't feel right. If it is though then as a first time offence it could be lowered. I think it's reckless and dangerous and he's been at risk of doing this for a while, so he needs a longer ban to reflect that. Doubt it will happen though.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I wonder if the schedule comes into it - like three weeks isn't three games atm

 

[Scotty]

Will the ban be in weeks or games? Given corona virus a massive spike and rugby gets put on hold for a time. They may do a X game ban

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Given Farrell's tackle technique, it was going to happen some time and fees lucky it hasn't happened earlier. Personally I don't think our next 10 is to big a deal. Is rate Simmonds as our top 10 after ford and Farrell (potentially being better than both) with Smith and umanga as reasonable alternatives.

12 is where we really need to find out what we are going to do. Tuilagi would seem the most obvious choice but with his injury record were want to see what else is available. Hill or James probably? I wouldn't put redpath in the England squad, got potential but he is still making too many very basic errors to be worth an England cap yet. One for the future when he becomes more reliable but not now.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I think Redpath will be capped sooner rather than later - all the inclusions in training camps seem to be a pretty obvious plan by EJ/the RFU to keep him away from Scotland

 

[BPM]

Journos reckon he'll get 6 weeks reduced to 3,

For me I'd say 8 - I hate hate HATE reductions for good behaviour/saying sorry etc.

I think there is a case for 'good behaviour' when players who are very clean make a one-off, bad tackle.

I wouldn't put Farrell in that category at all. He has plenty of form for bad tackles, he just hasn't been adequately punished for them. Not only are they dangerous, but they're also entirely deliberate. He may not have intended to make contact with Atkinson as he did, but when you come in that high and that hard, you have no defence IMO.

It's been a ticking time bomb and hopefully it leads to a change in his behaviour.

 

[Reiser99]

I think there is a case for 'good behaviour' when players who are very clean make a one-off, bad tackle.

I wouldn't put Farrell in that category at all. He has plenty of form for bad tackles, he just hasn't been adequately punished for them. Not only are they dangerous, but they're also entirely deliberate. He may not have intended to make contact with Atkinson as he did, but when you come in that high and that hard, you have no defence IMO.

It's been a ticking time bomb and hopefully it leads to a change in his behaviour.

Thinking about it more, how has no one pulled him aside and told him that if he doesn't change his tackle technique he will get red carded one day. He should have had a red card by now if the laws were applied properly. Either the coaches have said nothing and so should take some of the blame or Farrell has just ignored them which makes it worse. What's worse is the way his arm came swinging round. That is no misjudgement or getting his body in the wrong place, it's just reckless and dangerous.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

Thinking about it more, how has no one pulled him aside and told him that if he doesn't change his tackle technique he will get red carded one day. He should have had a red card by now if the laws were applied properly. Either the coaches have said nothing and so should take some of the blame or Farrell has just ignored them which makes it worse. What's worse is the way his arm came swinging round. That is no misjudgement or getting his body in the wrong place, it's just reckless and dangerous.

They probably did, told him he should use his arms. So he used his arms this time.

What sort of ban do we expect Faz to get? High swinging arm to the head with force and no mittigating factors.

So ford faz is out.

Who do we expect to be FHs? If we took 3

Ford
Cips?(or is it pointless taking him)
Smith/Umaga

He used to be 'armless, now a rigid army

Journos reckon he'll get 6 weeks reduced to 3,

For me I'd say 8 - I hate hate HATE reductions for good behaviour/saying sorry etc.

Maybe they should just call it increases for bad behaviour, having no remorse. There is a reason for having a difference. If a sociopathic player goes into the game with a mission to take someone'a head Off, succeeds, and then get the same ban as someone else who was reckless, that sociopath is more likely to come back and apply the same behaviour. By banning them, You are trying to change different things for the two types of players, one thing takes longer than the other to change, or requires a bigger disincentive.

Or you could just say, standard ban, but if you show no remorse you are banned forever.

On the other hand, sociopaths are renowned charmers, so they are the most likely to seem remorseful even when they are not.

I think I've come around to your view.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Maybe they should just call it increases for bad behaviour, having no remorse

Yup, this has always been my view on it

Entry points should be the minimum, if you're a repeat offender then you get it increased.
It's a joke when they half a ban because they "showed remorse".

 

[Yulia]

It's a joke when they half a ban because they "showed remorse".

And he remorsed?

 

[Reiser99]

Yup, this has always been my view on it

Entry points should be the minimum, if you're a repeat offender then you get it increased.
It's a joke when they half a ban because they "showed remorse".

I agree. Worst for me though has been people accused of sexual abuse saying they need help and so are going to a 'sex clinic'. A sex clinic should not be a substitute for jail. Unfortunately for some reason people in well known positions can seem to get away with things ordinary people wouldn't.

 

[BPM]

And he remorsed?

If you're asking whether Farrell showed any remorse, then yes, he did.

He stayed at the side of the pitch and waited to apologise to Atkinson.

That doesn't change the fact that he'd put in a horrible, dangerously reckless challenge.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Mid range ban is 12 weeks. I can't see him getting away with much less but as it's golden boy Farrell, he might do.

Are you sure? I looked it up earlier and read it as 6 weeks. It's mid range IMO and he'll get maximum mitigation, so I'd expect a 3 week ban given that the maximum reduction is 50%.

 

[Yulia]

If you're asking whether Farrell showed any remorse, then yes, he did.

He stayed at the side of the pitch and waited to apologise to Atkinson.

That doesn't change the fact that he'd put in a horrible, dangerously reckless challenge.

Yes, I agree. Just was interested how did he show a "remorse".
I read an article where they called him a "shoulder boy" and mentioned that it wasn't the first time of that type of tackle for him. Difficult to understand his behaviour..

 

[TRF_Olyy]

To be fair I can understand why his default tackle type is so borderline - how many backyard training sessions would he have had with his dad growing up?
It's very much a rugby league hit (target the ball, lead with the shoulder, wrap the arms if you can)
Should've been coached out of him by now but it's part of his DNA