Many fans angry that 'charity work' helped halve Owen Farrell's ban to five games
An independent disciplinary hearing panel’s decision to reduce a ban for England captain Owen Farrell from ten weeks to five based on various testimonials has not gone down very well. The Saracens fly-half was handed the suspension on Tuesday night for his red card offence in last Saturday’s Gallagher Premiership contest with Wasps.
The panel deemed the high tackle on Charlie Atkinson “reckless and not intentional”, with independent panel chair Mike Hamlin adding: “Testimonials provided by Mark McCall, Eddie Jones and the founders of a charity with which the player works very closely were of the highest quality.”
This resulted in the ban being halved to ‘five meaningful matches’, an outcome that has caused quite a stir on social media.
Many disgruntled people feel Farrell’s charity work was irrelevant when it came to dangerous play on a rugby field. In a collision that left Atkinson unconscious, which many have branded as potentially “career-ending”, a mass of people felt any prior charity work should have had no bearing on the hearing decision.
The input of McCall and Jones, the respective Saracens and England head coaches of Farrell, was also questioned as it was in both of their interests to have the player’s ban reduced as much as possible.
He faced a 10-game ban before off-field mitigation factors were taken into accounthttps://t.co/lz6AUdyenw
— RugbyPass (@RugbyPass) September 8, 2020
While a five-game ban has clearly displeased some, there was always a sense that any length of a ban was going to be controversial. It didn’t take much trawling through Twitter to see that many people were gunning for far longer bans than were perhaps unnecessary and wildly outside World Rugby’s sanctions for foul play.
A ten-game ban would not have caused as much of an outcry, but the 50 per cent reduction incensed. Farrell will be able to return to play from October 5, meaning he will miss Saracens’ Heineken Champions Cup quarter-final with Leinster this month but won’t miss any of England’s games which start in late October.
When I read this last night I was really quite annoyed. The testimonial from the charity founder really has no relevance to sanctioning foul play, especially where a player has essentially committed an assault on the field of play.https://t.co/19DUqhGlW0#Farrell #rugby [1/2]
— Kevin Carpenter (@KevSportsLaw) September 9, 2020
Owen Farrell tackle was 'dangerous, reckless but not intentional'.
Ban reduced from 10 matches to 5 because he does a bit for charity!
Eh?!
Disagree with the intentional part. He knows the rules.— Milena ZP???????????? (@MilenaZP_) September 9, 2020
I don't understand the relevance of the testimonial from the charity which Owen Farrell works with.
How can this be a deciding factor when reviewing his tackle which, by the way, is the worst I've seen since the new World Rugby laws were introduced. pic.twitter.com/LfMZKpkIG4
— Tom Pritchard (@TomJPritchard) September 8, 2020
I fail to see why Farrell's off field Charidee work has any bearing on the fact he's a repeat-offending dangerous cheat on field. pic.twitter.com/52a8bToyXg
— Calvin (@WelshEcon) September 9, 2020
Five weeks for Farrell?!?
Made absolutely no attempt to make a legitimate tackle.
Smoked a bloke in the back of the head, with his shoulder.
Regardless of what he does for charity, or how much of a nice bloke he is, that deserved a longer ban.#Farrell
— joshua marchant (@JoshuaMarchant) September 9, 2020
Oh dear. @EnglandRugby Supporting a player is one thing, but manipulating a disciplinary panel with tales of “good work for Charity” to get your man back is not Rugby. Farrell could have ended Atkinson’s career with his often repeated shocking tackle. Shame on you. #owenfarrell
— Simon Carter (@balatacarter) September 9, 2020
What have other people’s testaments and charities got to do with a decision based on what was a serious, potentially career ending, maybe worse, tackle? It was pure filth, but do some charity work and it’s ok? Nowt against Farrell but we are clearing the game up or we aren’t!
— Alex Campbell (@Alexbcampbell2) September 9, 2020
Speechless that the fact Farrell does alot of charity work has reduced punishment for (and trying to) decapitate an opponent.
Blazer boys strike again
— Andy Thomas (@andy_thomas89) September 9, 2020
Ban reduced from the entry-point by 50% after glowing testimonials from Eddie Jones and the charity Farrell works for. Yeah, there’s clearly no bias there. And back just in time to play for England. It just stinks! ?
— Ray Palmer (@raystratman) September 8, 2020
Comments on RugbyPass
What about changing the ball? To something heavier and more pointed that bounces unpredictably. Not this almost round football used these days.
35 Go to commentsThis is the problem with conservative mindsets and phycology, and homogenous sports, everybody wants to be the same, use the i-win template. Athlete wise everyone has to have muscles and work at the gym to make themselves more likely to hold on that one tackle. Do those players even wonder if they are now more likely to be tackled by that player as a result of there “work”? Really though, too many questions, Jake. Is it better Jake? Yes, because you still have that rugby of ole that you talk about. Is it at the highest International level anymore? No, but you go to your club or checkout your representative side and still engage with that ‘beautiful game’. Could you also have a bit of that at the top if coaches encouraged there team to play and incentivized players like Damian McKenzie and Ange Capuozzo? Of course we could. Sadly Rugby doesn’t, or didn’t, really know what direction to go when professionalism came. Things like the state of northern pitches didn’t help. Over the last two or three decades I feel like I’ve been fortunate to have all that Jake wants. There was International quality Super Rugby to adore, then the next level below I could watch club mates, pulling 9 to 5s, take on the countries best in representative rugby. Rugby played with flair and not too much riding on the consequences. It was beautiful. That largely still exists today, but with the world of rugby not quite getting things right, the picture is now being painted in NZ that that level of rugby is not required in the “pathway” to Super Rugby or All Black rugby. You might wonder if NZR is right and the pathway shouldn’t include the ‘amateur’, but let me tell you, even though the NPC might be made up of people still having to pull 9-5s, we know these people still have dreams to get out of that, and aren’t likely to give them. They will be lost. That will put a real strain on the concept of whether “visceral thrill, derring-do and joyful abandon” type rugby will remain under the professional level here in NZ. I think at some point that can be eroded as well. If only wanting the best athlete’s at the top level wasn’t enough to lose that, shutting off the next group, or level, or rugby players from easy access to express and showcase themselves certainly will. That all comes back around to the same question of professionalism in rugby and whether it got things right, and rugby is better now. Maybe the answer is turning into a “no”?
35 Go to commentsWow, didn’t realise there was such apathy to URC in SA, or by Champions Cup teams. Just read Nick’s article on Crusaders, are Sharks a similar circumstance? I think SA rugby has been far more balanced than NZs, no?
2 Go to commentsBut here in Australia we were told Penney was another gun kiwi coach, for the Tahs…….and yet again it turned out the kiwi coach was completely useless. Another con job on Australian rugby. As was Robbie Deans, as was Dave Rennie. Both coaches dumped from NZ and promoted to Australia as our saviour. And the Tahs lap them up knowing they are second rate and knowing that under pressure when their short comings are exposed in Australia as well, that they will fall in below the largest most powerful province and choose second rate Tah players to save their jobs. As they do and exactly as Joe Schmidt will do. Gauranteed. Schmidt was dumped by NZ too. That’s why he went overseas. That why kiwi coaches take jobs in Australia, to try and prove they are not as bad as NZ thought they were. Then when they get found out they try and ingratiate themselves to NZ again by dragging Australian teams down with ridiculous selections and game plans. NZ rugby’s biggest problem is that it can’t yet transition from MCaw Cheatism. They just don’t know how to try and win on your merits. It is still always a contest to see how much cheating you can get away with. Without a cheating genius like McCaw, they are struggling. This I think is why my wise old mate in NZ thinks Robertson will struggle. The Crusaders are the nursery of McCaw Cheatism. Sean Fitzpatrick was probably the father of it. Robertson doesn’t know anything else but other countries have worked it out.
15 Go to commentsIt could be coincidental or prescient that the All Blacks most dominant period under Steve Hansen was when the Crusaders had their least successful period under Todd Blackadder and then the positions reversed when Razor took over the Crusaders.
15 Go to commentsDefinitely sound read everybodyexpects immediate results these days, I don't think any team would travel well at all having lost three of the most important game changers in the game,compiled with the massive injury list they are now carrying, good to see a different more in depth perspective of a coaches history.
3 Go to commentsSinckler is a really big loss for English rugby.
1 Go to commentsThanks Nick The loss of players to OS, injury and retirement is certainly not helping the Crusaders. Ditto the coach. IMO Penny is there to hold the fort and cop the flak until new players and a new coach come through,…and that's understood and accepted by Penny and the Crusaders hierarchy. I think though that what is happening with the Crusaders is an indicator of what is happening with the other NZ SRP teams…..and the other SRP teams for that matter. Not enough money. The money has come via the SR competition and it’s not there anymore. It's in France, Japan and England. Unless or until something is done to make SR more SELLABLE to the NZ/Australia Rugby market AND the world rugby market the $s to keep both the very best players and the next rung down won't be there. They will play away from NZ more and more. I think though that NZ will continue to produce the players and the coaches of sufficient strength for NZ to have the capacity to stay at the top. Whether they do stay at the top as an international team will depend upon whether the money flowing to SRP is somehow restored, or NZ teams play in the Japan comp, or NZ opts to pick from anywhere. As a follower of many sports I’d have to say that the organisation and promotion of Super Rugby has been for the last 20 years closest to the worst I’ve ever seen. This hasn't necessarily been caused by NZ, but it’s happened. Perhaps it can be fixed, perhaps not. The Crusaders are I think a symptom of this, not the cause
15 Go to commentsNo way. If you are trying to picture New Zealand rugby with an All Blacks mindset, there have been two factors instrumental to the decline of NZ rugby to date. Those are the horror that the Blues have become and, probably more so, the fixture that the Crusaders became. I don’t think it was healthy to have one team so dominant for so long, both for lack of proper representation of players from outside that environment and on the over reliance on players from within it. If you are another international side, like Ireland for example, sure. You can copy paste something succinct from one level to the next and experience a huge increase in standards, but ultimately you will not be maximizing it, which is what you need to perform to the level the ABs do. Added to that is the apathy that develops in the whole game as a result of one sides dominance. NZ, Super, and Championship rugby should all experience a boom as a result of things balancing out. That said, there is a lot of bad news happening in NZ rugby recently, and I’m not sure the game can be handled well enough here to postpone the always-there feeling of inevitable decline of rugby.
15 Go to commentsNo SA supporter miss Super Rugby - a product that is experiencing significant head wind in ANZ - the competition from rival codes are intense, match attendance figures are at a historical low and the negativity of commentators such as Kirwan and Wilson have accelerated the downward spiral in NZ. After the next RWC in 2027 sponsors will follow Qantas and start leaving in droves.
2 Go to commentsLike others, I am not seeing the connection between this edition of the Crusaders and the All Blacks future prospects under Razor. I think the analysis of the Crusaders attack recently is helpful because Razor and his coaching team used to be able to slot new guys in to their systems and see them succeed. Several of Razor’s coaches are still there so it would be surprising if the current attack and set piece has been overhauled to a great extent - but based on that analysis, it may have been. Whether it is too many new guys due to injuries or retirement or a failure of current Crusaders systems is the main question to be answered imo. It doesn’t seem relevant for the ABs.
15 Go to commentsharry potter is set in stone. he creates stability and finishes well. exactly what schmidt likes. he’s the ben smith of australian rugby. i think it could quite easily be potter toole and kellaway for the foreseeable future.
5 Go to commentsThis is short sighted from Clayton if you ask me, smacks of too much preseason planning and no adaptability. What if DMac is out for a must win match, are they still only going to bring their best first five and playmaker on late in the game? Trusting the game to someone who wasn’t even part of planning (they would have had Trask pinned in as Jacomb preseason). Perhaps if the Crusaders were better they would not have done this, but either way imo you take this opportunity to play a guy you might need starting in a final rather than having their 12th game getting comfortable coming off the bench.
1 Go to commentsThanks Brett.. At last a positive article on the potential of Wallaby candidates, great to read. Schmidt’s record as an international rugby coach speaks for itself, I’m somewhat confident he will turn the Wallaby’s fortunes around …. on the field. It will be up to others to steady the ship off the paddock. But is there a flaw in my optimism? We have known all along that Australia has the players to be very competitive with their international rivals. We know that because everyone keeps telling us. So why the poor results? A question that requires a definitive answer before the turn around can occur. Joe Schmidt signed on for 2 years, time to encompass the Lions tour of 2025. By all accounts he puts family first and that’s fair enough, but I would wager that his 2 year contract will be extended if the next 18 months or so shows the statement “Australia has the players” proves to be correct. The new coach does not have a lot of time to meld together an outfit that will be competitive in the Rugby Championship - it will be interesting to see what happens. It will be interesting to see what happens with Giteau law, the new Wallaby coach has already verbalised that he would to prefer to select from those who play their rugby in Australia. His first test in charge is in July just over 3 months away .. not a long time. I for one wish him well .. heaven knows Australia needs some positive vibes.
21 Go to commentsWhat a load of bollocks. The author has forgotten to mention the fact that the Crusaders have a huge injury toll with top world class players out. Not to mention the fact that they are obviously in a transition period. No this will not spark a slow death for NZ rugby, but it does mean there will be a new Super Rugby champion. Anyone who knows anything about NZ rugby knows that there is some serious talent here, it just isn’t all at the Crusaders.
15 Go to commentsI wouldn’t spend the time on Nawaqanitawase! No point in having him filling in a jersey when he’s committed to leave Union. Give the jersey to a young prospect who will be here in the future.
5 Go to commentsIt was a pleasure to watch those guys playing with such confidence. That trio can all be infuriating for different reasons and I can see why Jones might have decided against them. No way to justify leaving Ikitau out though. Jorgensen and him were both scheduled to return at the same time. Only one of them plays for Randwick and has a dad who is great mates with the national coach though.
53 Go to commentsBrayden Iose and Peter Lakai are very exciting Super Rugby players but are too short and too light to ever be a Test 8 vs South Africa, France, Ireland, and England, Lakai could potentially be a Test player at 7 if he is allowed to focus on 7 for Hurricanes.
7 Go to commentsPencils “Thomas du Toit” into possible 2027 Bok squad.
1 Go to commentsDon’t see why Harrison makes the bench. Jones can play at 10 if needed, and there is a good case for starting her there to begin with if testing combinations. That would leave room for Sing on the bench
1 Go to comments