Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Kyle Sinckler banned for F-bomb, will miss England's Six Nations opener

England's Kyle Sinckler. (Photo by Dan Mullan/The RFU Collection via Getty Images)

Bristol prop Kyle Sinckler has been banned for swearing at Gallagher Premiership referee Karl Dickson and will miss the start of England’s Six Nations campaign on February 6 at home to Scotland.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Bristol prop appeared before an online independent disciplinary panel on Tuesday after being cited by independent citing commissioner Duncan Bell after his club’s 20-7 win at Exeter on Saturday took the Bears top of the Gallagher Premiership.

The 27-year-old was cited for “failing to respect the authority of the match official, contrary to World Rugby law 9.28″. Sinckler contested the charge but it was upheld by the independent disciplinary panel, comprising Richard Whittam (chair), with Becky Essex and Leon Lloyd, which gave the player a two-week suspension. He is free to play again on February 9.

Video Spacer

Ex-England hooker Brian Moore in conversation with Jim Hamilton

Video Spacer

Ex-England hooker Brian Moore in conversation with Jim Hamilton

The independent disciplinary panel said in its findings which were published on Wednesday: “Kyle Sinckler accepted that he used foul language at the referee. He did not accept the conduct warranted a red card.

“The panel viewed the live recordings of the incident and were satisfied that his shout of ‘are you fxxxxxx serious’ was:

  • Aggressive;
  • Was directed at the referee.  It followed almost immediately after the referee explained that he had determined that the Exeter player (Luke Cowan-Dickie) who had tackled Sinckler had attempted to wrap his arms. Sinckler turned his head towards the referee before he shouted at him;
  • On review with the TMO, the referee did penalise the player who had tackled him.

“The player was candid in his evidence as to why he had done so and regretted his actions.  The panel found that his actions disrespected the authority of the referee. It was in breach of a core value of rugby – respect of match officials – and warranted a red card.

“The panel determined that in all the circumstances it was a low entry point with no relevant mitigation.  The sanction is a two-week ban.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Sinckler is due to now miss the following Gallagher Premiership games: Bristol vs Bath on January 29 and vs Sale on February 5. For the second weekend of the ban, it was decided he must miss the Sharks game unless he is picked by Eddie Jones, in which case he should miss the Scotland match.

Sinckler had taken to Twitter on Saturday following the comment he directed at the referee, saying: “Want to apologise for my reaction today. Not the example I want to be setting. Heat of the moment stuff. Will make a conscious effort to improve. My bad.”

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

M
Mzilikazi 1 hour ago
Western Force and ACT Brumbies looking for signs of progress in Super Rugby Pacific

It’s good to be at the start of the season, to be tipping the games again. Thanks for the article Brett. An interesting and, for me, informative read, as I have not kept up with all the news of all the teams, really only Qld.


Whatever happens in the search for a new coach for the WB’s, all of Les Kiss, Stephen Larkham and Dan McKellar will be coaching their respective teams this year. I believe Kiss to be the best of the three, and by a significant margin(the bad result against the Chiefs in the playoffs last season the one scar), and that gives Qld., in my view, an extra edge.


I agree, Brett, that Qld. on paper, and on squad strength and experience, look the best bet for Australia. If Tim Ryan builds on last year, he could be a WB starter against the Lions. The locking strength and depth is approaching that of teams like Leinster, Toulouse etc…not as strong ofc, but in Super Rugby circles, yes.


I like the type of game Kiss is building. Really carrying on from where he was rudely interrupted at London Irish, when they fell over. The one game on tour where they beat Ulster was a significant pointer to where they are at. While not a top Ulster unit, it was still a very good team, not easy to beat in Belfast. Sadly the Bristol game was a training run, but still valuable in a way, as the group were touring, building systems and understanding.


One player I will be watching with interest is Finn Hurley at the Highlanders. He was brought to my attention a year ago by the grandson of a friend, who knew him at Otago Boys High in Dunedin. Small, but resilient, with a good boot, from what I have seen on clips, he should have a useful first full year as a Highlander.


Hope the Force do well… have always had a “soft spot” for them. But good luck to all franchises, and pray for no serious injuries….as I have done forever, as aplayer, then coach, and now long retired rugby fanatic 😀

2 Go to comments
J
Jfp123 3 hours ago
New twist sees Romain Ntamack's Six Nations ban extended

I’m still not convinced. I think everyone should be punished equally for similar actions, rather than differentiating punishment on the basis of speculative psychological analysis. I still think accusations are based more on the mindset of the accuser than the accused. As mentioned, I can’t possibly say why Ntamack committed foul play and you may be right, but that’s not the only possible explanation. Have you never lost concentration when work’s a walkover and your best efforts aren’t needed. We know very little about Ntamack, perhaps major upheavals off the pitch were on his mind, eg maybe worried about the baby. Or how about turning your speculation in the opposite direction? Some pundits mentioned there were afters to the tackle, which presumably indicate the Welsh player had lost his temper. Were those afters delivered silently, or were they accompanied by words? Could he have said something insulting about Ntamack’s mixed heritage, or family, or something else that lit the blue touch paper? I don’t suppose he was complimenting him on his hair! No provocation justifies dangerous play, whether an HIA examination is required or not, and Ntamack deserved his red card and punishment. But if this is what happened, would you call both players’ losses of temper ‘malicious’? After all, Ntamack has taken thousands of big hits over his career without retaliating. The foul was out of character, so should it be explained away by afters to the tackle that were malicious? No one landed a punch, but are all punches malicious, whatever the provocation? Now both this scenario and yours take actions which actually happened, and then progress to pure speculation about the unknown. There are other possibilities too. I’m certainly not saying any of the possibilities discussed are what happened and I don’t presume to know what the players were thinking at the time. If you want to make a case for punishing all players who get a red card, in a similar way with similar outcomes, for longer, that would be fair enough. But I don’t think it’s fair to call for special punishment for a particular player based on speculation.

7 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Jack Conan: A Lion longer in the tooth, but bearing his claws Jack Conan: A Lion longer in the tooth, but bearing his claws
Search