The Nigel Owens verdict on controversial Freddie Steward red card
Nigel Owens has had his say on last weekend’s controversial red card for Freddie Steward, the England full-back who had his sending-off rescinded at a midweek disciplinary hearing. It was during the first half in Dublin on Saturday when Steward was given his marching orders by referee Jaco Peyper following a collision with the head of Ireland’s Hugo Keenan.
Rugby fans were divided by what had taken place in a match that the Irish went on to win 29-16 and clinch the Guinness Six Nations Grand Slam.
It was Wednesday morning when the decision from the previous night’s virtually held disciplinary hearing emerged, a statement explaining that while there was head contact and that Steward had been reckless in his actions, mitigating factors including the late change in the dynamics and positioning of Keenan should have resulted in the issue of a yellow rather than a red card.
Keenan commented in the aftermath of the disciplinary hearing decision: “It’s probably fair enough, isn’t it? It’s up to the citing commissioners and the refs to make those decisions, but it was a bit of an accident, wasn’t it? He was very apologetic nearly straight away after and then after on the pitch as well.”
Now, retired centurion referee Owens has waded into the post-mortem and given his verdict on the latest edition of Whistle Watch. “Pretty much everybody has had their say on the big talking point of the weekend,” he began, speaking from his farm in Wales.
“I would have to say the split is probably 60/40 in the yellow but not red card camp. I want you to try and take your emotions out of the decision-making or your view on it because if you are English, you will have a different view to probably most Irish. And also, if you are one of those in the camp that thinks the red cards spoil a game, you are automatically going to be thinking you don’t like that red card.
“The referee must get rid of all that emotion. He must deal with the facts, and it comes down simply to this: does he believe there has been foul play? If there is foul play, he then goes to mitigation and he goes to the degree of danger. If you look at it, look at the way the referee deals with it, it is very difficult to argue with his thought process.
“So, we can follow it and can agree with a red card, that the referee making the decision on the day said there is foul play. What he thinks is he believes that Freddie Steward is in a position where he could have changed what he was going to do next and because of that we have foul play, we have head contact and have a high degree of danger, we don’t have really much mitigation to take it down from a red – although some people may argue that there is – and therefore we have a red card.
“Totally understandable decision. Now when I am looking at that decision myself, I am thinking, ‘Do you know what, it is very difficult to argue with what Jaco Peyper has seen and why he has given the red card’.
“Now let’s go to the yellow card camp. Some are not even on a yellow card but most of you are if you are not on a red. So, you feel that Freddie Steward couldn’t do anything different. He couldn’t do anything to change what happened next and if that is what you feel and if that is what the referee felt at the time, then the referee would have come from a red to a yellow or he may have even decided there is no foul play because there was nothing he could do.
“So even though you have head contact, you haven’t got foul play and nobody has done nothing wrong so then we don’t have a sanction. But most of you are on the yellow card, so you feel that there was nothing Freddie Steward could have done differently. If that is the case then a yellow card is totally understandable.
“But to be honest, I am looking at this myself I can’t really disagree with the red card. Now, it would be very unfair for me to sit here and tell you I would have given a red or I would have given a yellow because I am not in that moment on the field. So in that moment on the field, it all comes down to what the referee deals with – the facts.
“Forget the emotions. Forget that you are English. Forget that you don’t like a 15 against 14 game. All of that is out the window – you deal with the facts and the facts are what Jaco Peyper explained and we have a red card which is not the wrong decision.
“But as I said, if you felt that Freddie Steward couldn’t do anything different, you give a yellow card, then I couldn’t disagree with you as well. I am very sorry to tell you, those who are sitting there going, ‘Nigel is sitting on the fence’ – I am not sitting on the fence because this is the game of rugby, you are going to have decisions that will just split the view on it and this is one of them.”
Comments on RugbyPass
You probably read that parling is going to coach the wallaby lineout but if not before now you have.
12 Go to commentsIf someone like Leo Cullen was in O’Gara’s place I don’t hear Boo-ing. It’s not just that La Rochelle has hurt Leinster and O’Gara is their Irish boss. It’s the needle that he brings and the pantomime activity before the game around pretending that Munster were supporting LaRochelle just because O’Gara is from Cork. That’s dividing Irish provinces just to get an advantage for his French Team. He can F*ck right off with that. BOOOOO! (but not while someone is lying injured)
1 Go to commentsDid the highlanders party too hard before the game? They were the pits.
1 Go to commentsWhat a player! Not long until he’s in the England side, surely?
1 Go to commentsHe seems to have the same aura as Marcus Smith - by which I mean he’s consistently judged as if he’s several years younger than he actually is. Mngomezulu has played 24 times for the Stormers. When Pollard was his age he had played 24 times for South Africa! He has more time to develop, but he has also had time to do some developing already, and he hasn’t demonstrated nearly as much talent in that time as one would expect. If he is a generational talent, then it must be a pretty poor generation.
4 Go to commentsThe greatest Springbok coach of all time is entirely on the money. Rassie and Jacques have given the south african public a great few years, but the success of the springbok selection policy will need to be judged in light of what comes next. The poor condition that the provincial system is currently in doesn’t bode well for the next few years of international rugby, and the insane 2026 schedule that the Boks have lined up could also really harm both provincial and international consistency.
16 Go to commentsJake White is a brilliant coach and a master in the press. This is another masterclass in media relations and PR but its also a very narrow view with arguments that dont always hold water. White wants his team to win, he wants the best players in SA and wants his team competitive. You however have to face up to the reality of a poor exchange rate and big clubs with big budgets. SA Rugby cant compete and unless it can find more money SA players will keep leaving regardless of Springbok eligibility and this happened in 2015 - 2017. Also rugby is not cricket. Cricket has 3 formats and T20 cricket is where the money is at. When it comes to club vs country the IPL is king but that wont happen because the international calendar does not clash with the club calendar in rugby. So the argument about rugby going down the same path as cricket is really a non-starter
16 Go to commentsNZ rugby seem not to have learnt anything from professional rugby. Super rugby was dying and SA left before they died with the competition. SA rugby did a u turn on their approach to international players playing overseas and such players are now selected for Bok teams. As much as each country would love to retain their players playing in local competitions, this is the way the world is evolving my friends. Move with it or stay 20 years behind the times. One more thing. NZ rugby hierarchy think they are the big cheese. Take a more humble approach guys. You do not seem to have your players best interests at heart.
3 Go to commentsBeaches? In Cardiff? Where?
1 Go to commentsHe is right , the Crusaders will be a threat. Scott Barrett, ( particularly), Fergus Burke , Codie Taylor, ( from sabbatical) etc due back soon for the Crusaders. There are others like Zach Gallagher too. People can right the Crusaders off, Top 8 , here we come !!
1 Go to commentsWe will always struggle for money to match the other sides but the least the WRU can do is invest properly in Welsh rugby. Too much has been squandered on vanity projects like the hotel and roof walk amongst others which will never see a massive return. Hanging the 4 pro sides out to dry over the last decade is now coming back to bite the WRU financially as well as on the pitch. You reap what you sow.
1 Go to commentsWhat do you get if you cross a doctor with a fish? A plastic sturgeon
14 Go to commentsWhat happened to feleti Kaitu’u? Hasnt played in a while right?
1 Go to commentsGregor I just can’t agree with you. You are trying to find something that just isn’t there. Jordie Barrett has signed until 2028. By the end of that he would have spent probably 11-12 years on Super Rugby and you say he can’t possibly have one season playing somewhere else. It is absurd. What about this scenario, the NZR play hard ball and he decides to leave and play overseas. How would that affect the competition. There seems to be an agenda by certain journalists to push certain agendas and don’t like it when it’s not to their liking. I fully support the NZR on this. Gregor needs to get a life.
3 Go to commentsHope he stays as believe he can do a great job.
1 Go to commentsMake what step up? Manie has a World Cup winner’s medal around his neck and changed the way the Springboks can play. He doesn’t have anything to prove to anyone. The win record of the Boks with him in the team is tremendous. Sacha can be wonderful and I hope he has a very succesful Bok career, but comparing him to Manie in terms of the next Bok flyhalf is very strange. Manie is the incumbent (not the next) and doing pretty incredibly.
4 Go to comments00 😍 U
1 Go to commentsSabbaticals have helped keep NZ’s very best talent in the country on long term deals - this fact has been left out of this article. Much like the articles calling to allow overseas players to be selected, yet can only name one player currently not signed to NZR who would be selected for the ABs. And in the entire history of NZ players leaving to play overseas, literally only 4 or 5 have left in their prime as current ABs. (Piatau, Evans, Hayman, Mo’unga,?) Yes Carter got an injury while playing in France 16 years ago, but he also got a tournament ending injury at the 2011 World Cup while taking mid-week practice kicks at goal. Maybe Jordie gets a season-ending injury while playing in Ireland, maybe he gets one next week against the Brumbies. NZR have many shortcomings, but keeping the very best players in the country and/or available for ABs selection is not one of them. Likewise for workload management - players missing 2 games out of 14 is hardly a big deal in the grand scheme of things. Again let’s use some facts - did it stop the Crusaders winning SR so many times consecutively when during any given week they would be missing 2 of their best players? The whole idea of the sabbatical is to reward your best players who are willing to sign very long term deals with some time to do whatever they want. They are not handed out willy-nilly, and at nowhere near the levels that would somehow devalue Super Rugby. In this particular example JB is locked in with NZR for what will probably (hopefully) be the best years of his career, hard to imagine him not sticking around for a couple more after for a Lions tour and one more world cup. He has the potential to become the most capped AB of all time. A much better outcome than him leaving NZ for a minimum of 3 years at the age of 27, unlikely to ever play for the ABs again, which would be the likely alternative.
3 Go to commentsJake White talks more sense than anything I've read in the last 5 years. Hope someone's listening.
16 Go to commentsThe Springboks tried going down the road of only picking home-based players and it was an unmitigated disaster in 2016 and 2017. Picking overseas-based players has been one of the main reason the Boks have done so well since 2018, not only because of the quality Rassie could call on, but because of the knowledge and experience those players brought into camp from England, France and Japan. With some of the big names playing abroad it also gave younger players in SA the chance to break through at franchise level. Would we have seen the emergence of a Ruan Nortje if RG and Lood were still at the Bulls? Not so sure. I understand why Jake would want to block players leaving since his job depends on good results but it’s an approach that would take Bok rugby back to the bad old days and no South African wants to see that.
16 Go to comments