Pat Lam didn't pull his verbal punches on live TV when raging over the Siale Piutau ban
Bristol boss Pat Lam used a post-game live television interview on Tuesday night to sternly criticise the Gallagher Premiership judiciary process that resulted in Siale Piutau getting the same three-match ban as Worcester’s Andrew Kitchener, the player who punched him in a match last Friday night.
Kitchener was sent off for punching Piutau in the 79th-minute at Sixways, but the Bristol veteran was also cited for striking back in what Lam claimed was self-defence. Piutau was chosen to play against Northampton on Tuesday, but Lam had to rejig his selection following the suspension that was announced on Monday evening.
The whole process left the Bears coach annoyed and he said as much when interviewed by BT Sport following the 47-10 Ashton Gate win over Saints. “I’m just extremely frustrated. When I look at Siale Piutau and the person he is, the leader he is and the man he is – in the judiciary process of both Andrew Kitchener and Siale Piutau, the messages and the inconsistency is the difficulty that I’m struggling with because Siale is being attacked by two guys,” said Bristol boss Lam.
“He is 5ft 11. 6ft 7, 6ft 6 are coming at him. Our game should be a safe place but for two guys to come at him, particularly one, and start swinging at him. Our process means you’re not allowed to strike back. Now he [Piutau] has had five concussions: if he gets whacked in the head, he’s lucky he blocked the first one. We have had Will Hurrell’s career ended (with a concussion) and he [Piutau] is getting pummelled in the head.
“But if he doesn’t strike back, if he doesn’t defend himself, which in common law you can defend yourself but on the rugby field you are not allowed to, you have just got to take it… it was an unprovoked attack. He [Kitchener] came at him – but the message is that you can do that, start a fight, punch someone and it’s the same penalty for both.
Pat Lam wanted the floor to address Siale Piutau's three-match ban.
"You've got to have self-defense. You should be able to defend yourself if someone attacks you lie that."
"What do I say to his wife & kids if he gets a whack in the head?"
"Things have got to change…" pic.twitter.com/8q9xCbhLy2
— Rugby on BT Sport (@btsportrugby) September 8, 2020
“And also to be able to swear at a referee and not be charged on it, and the inconsistencies when we talk about some of the hits that were going in there, there needs to be real clarity and shake up because the message that came out of that is wrong.
“He [Piutau] has got his children and a wife and is a big leader in our team. But (for it) to be put out there the way it has isn’t great. I don’t think it is great for our game. You have got to have self-defence. What has he [Piutau] done? He’d made the tackle, turned the ball over, stepped back, the guy didn’t like it and he walked over and started swinging at him.
“Yeah, he didn’t connect because Siale blocked it out, but you should be able to defend yourself if someone wants to attack you like that. For that person [Kitchener] to get the same punishment as someone defending himself, what do I say to Siale’s wife and his children if he gets a whack in the head and he can’t defend himself? Sorry, your husband is in hospital?
“We talk in the game about mental wellness, we talk about player welfare but to go into that (judiciary) process, I was absolutely disappointed. I just hope that some good can come out of this… for someone to swear the way they did at our No1 referee (Wayne Barnes) and there is no charge, yet we saw some of the hits on Semi Radradra, we saw the hit on Ben Earl. I have had players cited for less than that but that is allowed to happen.
“Things have got to change, it really does because player safety is important. They break it down to Siale swung a punch but put it in context, put it on the street. You have got two men running at you. You can (either) take it and get damaged or you can protect yourself. And if you are going to protect yourself from that type of attack, you should be protected in the judiciary by our game. I just want the best for our game and our players.”
Having listened to Bristol boss Lam vent his grievances, BT Sport pundit Lawrence Dallaglio added about the Piutau situation: “There is a lot of frustration there, you can tell that. A lot of sensitivity as well, Will Hurrell has had to retire because of concussion.
“I can see where Pat is coming from in the sense that Siale Piutau was the one that was attacked and yet the punishment for both players ends up being the same. I don’t get that myself in the judiciary. One guy throws a punch, Andrew Kitchener, and gets three games. One guy defends himself in self-defence, which he is not allowed to do on the rugby field, and also gets three games. I don’t get that. And I think there were a few other incidents in the game that Pat Lam feels very bitter and disappointed about.”
Fellow pundit Ugo Moyne then interjected: “But Lawrence, the whole process – and we are not talking about this in isolation – has been flawed for years. The fact that you can get your ban halved just because of records or pleading guilty and all the rest of it is appalling. Since lockdown, the referees have said that decisions on the pitch, you want them to make sense. We need the judiciary process to also make sense and it just doesn’t.”
Dallaglio replied: “People want consistency. Dylan Hartley was sent off the field for swearing at a referee. Yet Pat Lam has raised an issue there saying that has not been dealt with. Semi Radradra took a forearm to the head, that wasn’t cited so that is another inconsistency in the game. They haven’t covered themselves in glory with this particular judiciary process.”
"I felt ‘I think I’m okay’, but it just deteriorated over the game. I couldn’t understand the calls. I couldn’t remember…
Posted by RugbyPass on Sunday, 26 April 2020
Comments on RugbyPass
What a load of old bull!
1 Go to commentsOf the rugby I’ve born witness to in my lifetime - 1990 to date - I recognize great players throughout those years. But I have no doubt the game and the players are on average better today. So I doubt going back further is going to prove me wrong. The technical components of the game, set pieces, scrums, kicks, kicks at goal. And in general tactics employed are far more efficient, accurate and polished. Professional athletes that have invested countless hours on being accurate. There is one nation though that may be fairly competitive in any era - and that for me is the all blacks. And New Zealand players in general. NZ produces startling athletes who have fantastic ball skills. And then the odd phenomenon like Lomu. Mcaw. Carter. Better than comparing players and teams across eras - I’ve often had this thought - that it would be very interesting to have a version of the game that is closer to its original form. What would the game look like today if the rules were rolled back. Not rules that promote safety obviously - but rules like: - a try being worth 1 point and conversion 2 points. Hence the term “try”. Earning a try at goals. Would we see more attacking play? - no lifting in the lineouts. - rucks and break down laws in general. They looked like wrestling matches in bygone eras. I wonder what a game applying 1995 rules would look like with modern players. It may be a daft exercise, but it would make for an interesting spectacle celebrating “purer” forms of the game that roll back the rules dramatically. I’d love to see an exhibition match like that.
25 Go to commentsIrish Rugby CEO be texting Andy Farrell “Andy, i found our next Kiwi Irishman”
4 Go to commentsI certainly don’t miss drinking beers at 8am in the morning watching rugby games being played in NZ.
1 Go to commentsThis looks like a damage limitation exercise for Wales, keeping back some of their more effective players for the last 20/25 minutes to try and counter England’s fresh legs so the Red Roses don’t rack up a big score.
1 Go to commentsVery unlikely the Bulls will beat Leinster in Dublin. It would be different in Pretoria.
1 Go to commentsI think it is a dangerous path to go down to ban a player for the same period that a player they injured takes to recover. Players would be afraid to tackle anyone. I once tackled my best friend at school in a practice match and sprained his ankle. I paid for it by having to play fly-half instead of full-back for the rest of that season’s fixtures.
5 Go to commentsJust such a genuine good bloke…and probably the best all round player in his generation. Good guys do come first sometimes and he handled the W.Cup loss with great attitude.
2 Go to commentsWord in France is that he’s on the radar of a few Top14 clubs.
4 Go to commentsGet blocking Travis, this guy has styles and he’s gonna make a swift impact…!
1 Go to commentsWhat remorse? She claimed that her dangerous tackle wasn’t worthy of a red! She should be compensating the injured player for loss of earnings at the minimum. Her ban should include the recovery time of the injured player as well as the paltry 3 match ban.
5 Go to commentsArdie is a legend. Finished and klaar. Two things: “Yeah, yeah, I have had a few conversations with Razor just around feedback on my game and what I am doing well, what I need to improve on or work-ons. It’s kind of been minimal, mate, but it’s all that I need over here in terms of how to be better, how to get better and what I am doing well.” I hope he’s downplaying it - and that it’s not that “minimal”. The amount of communication and behind the scenes preparation the Bok coaches put into players - Rassie and co would be all over Ardie and being clear on what is expected of him. This stands out for me as something teams should really be looking at in terms of the boks success from a coaching point of view. And was surprised by the comment - “minimal”. In terms of the “debate” around Ireland and South Africa. Nice one Ardie. Indeed. There’s no debate.
2 Go to commentsThere’s a bit of depth there but realistically Australian players have a long way to go to now catch up. The game is moving on fast and Australia are falling behind. Australian sides still don’t priories the breakdown like they should, it’s a non-negotiable if you want to compete on the international stage. That goes for forwards and backs. The Australian team could have a back row that could make a difference but the problem is they don’t have a tight five that can do the business. Tupou is limited in defence, overweight and unfit and the locks are a long way from international standard. Frost is soft and Salakai-Loto is too small so that means they need a Valentini at 8 who has to do the hard graft so limits the effectiveness of the backrow. Schmidt really needs to get a hard working, tough tight 5 if he wants to get this team firing.
3 Go to commentsSorry Morgan you must have been the “go to for a quote” ex player this week. Its rnd 6 and there is plenty of time to cement a starting 15 and finishing 8 so I have no such concerns.
2 Go to commentsGreat read. I wish you had done this article on the ROAR.
2 Go to commentsThe current AB coaching team is basically the Crusaders so it smacks of wanting their familiar leaders around. This is not a good look for the future of the ABs or the younger players in Super working their way up the player ladder. Razor is touted as innovative, forward looking but his early moves look like insecurity and insular, provincial thinking. He is the AB's coach not the Golden Oldies.
10 Go to commentsSimple reason for wanting him back. Robertson wants him as captain. Otherwise he wouldn’t be bothering chasing him. Not enough reason to come back just to mentor.
10 Go to commentsI had not considered this topic like this at all, brilliant read. I had been looking at his record at the Waratahs and thought it odd the Crusaders appointed him, then couple that with all that experience and talent departing and boom. They’ve got some great talent developing though, and in all honesty I don’t think anyone would be over confident taking them on in a playoff match, no matter how poor the first half of their season was. I think they can pull a game out of their ass when it counts.
2 Go to commentsNot a bad list but not Porecki and not Donaldson. Not because they are Tahs, or Ex Tahs, they are just not good enough. Edmed should be ahead. Far more potential. Wilson should be 8 and Valentini 6. Wilson needs to be told by his father and his coach, stop bloody running in to brick wall defence. You’re not playing under the genius Thorn any more. He’s a fantastic angle runner. The young new 8 from the Brumbies looks really good too. The Lonegrans are just too small for international rugby as is Paisami, as is Hamish Stewart at 12. Both great at Super Rugby level. Stewart could have been a great 10 if not for Brad Thorn. Uru should be there and so should Tupou. Tupou just needs good Australian coaching which he hasn’t been getting. I don’t think Schmidt will excite him.
3 Go to commentsIf he wants to come back then he should. He will be a major asset to the younger locks and could easily be played as an impact player off the bench coming on in the last 30. He is fit, strong and capable and has all the experience to make up for any loss in physical prowess. He could also be brought back with a view to coaching within the structures one day. Duane Vermeulen played until he was 37 or 38. He is now a roaming coach within the South African coaching structures. He was valuable in the last world cup and has been a major influence on Jasper Wiese and other young players which has helped and accelerated their development and growth. Whitelock could do the exact same thing for NZ
10 Go to comments