Scarlet Fever Llanelli Rugby Sport Wales Tickets Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > RUGBY > GENERAL RUGBY
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Wales team to face England at Twickers
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login


Wales team to face England at Twickers

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 6789>
Author
Message
Why View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 August 2010
Status: Online
Points: 8464
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Why Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 August 2023 at 2:07pm
I will stand by the fact the post was moronic but apologise for calling TB a moron. I would suggest he comes with me to tact school as opposed to tackle school which as OF has proved is plainly useless. 
She asks why i still can't answer. I guess its in the blood.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
hoppy View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 May 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2211
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hoppy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 August 2023 at 2:07pm
red

World Rugby will appeal against the decision to overturn the red card given to England captain Owen Farrell against Wales.

Farrell's yellow card was upgraded to red by the new 'bunker' review system after a high tackle.

A disciplinary panel reviewing the incident on Tuesday found mitigating factors and overturned the dismissal.

World Rugby said in a statement confirming the appeal that "player welfare is the number one priority".

If World Rugby is successful, Farrell would miss a chunk of England's World Cup pool stage games.

Farrell became the first England player to receive a red card from rugby's new 'bunker' review system after he made a high tackle on Taine Basham during England's 19-17 win over Wales last week.

An independent judicial committee (IJC) then rescinded the 31-year-old's dismissal, clearing him to play a key role for England at the upcoming World Cup.

But now an Independent Appeal Committee will be appointed to determine the matter at the earliest possible opportunity.

The statement said: "World Rugby fully supports the important role that an independent disciplinary process plays in upholding the integrity and values of the sport, particularly regarding foul play involving head contact.

"Player welfare is the sport's number one priority, and the Head Contact Process is central to that mission at the elite level of the sport."

Further details regarding the hearing, including appointments and date, will be confirmed by Six Nations Rugby.

England face Ireland on Saturday in Dublin and then Fiji on 26 August at Twickenham in two final warm-up matches before their opening World Cup game against Argentina on 9 September in Marseille.

Back to Top
Wil Chips View Drop Down
Rambler
Rambler
Avatar

Joined: 23 August 2009
Location: Africa
Status: Online
Points: 49886
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Wil Chips Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 August 2023 at 2:46pm
Ref gives a yellow.
Match day official adjudication raises it to red
Hearing reduces it to yellow.
Governing body try to reinstate the red.

World rugby sink below some African country electoral processes through this mess.



Back to Top
Rob Hunt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 03 April 2020
Location: Burry Port
Status: Offline
Points: 355
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rob Hunt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 August 2023 at 3:35pm
Originally posted by Wil Chips Wil Chips wrote:

Ref gives a yellow.
Match day official adjudication raises it to red
Hearing reduces it to yellow.
Governing body try to reinstate the red.

World rugby sink below some African country electoral processes through this mess.



Or even below the USA if you believe Trump.
Back to Top
Why View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 August 2010
Status: Online
Points: 8464
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Why Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 August 2023 at 8:40pm
I think he was treated leniently of course but they have made decision get on with it when will it end with WR appealing winning then Farrell appealing against the appeal. The only people who make money are the lawyers while the games admin and reputation is in tatters. 

Edited by Why - 17 August 2023 at 8:41pm
She asks why i still can't answer. I guess its in the blood.
Back to Top
reesytheexile View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 11 August 2012
Location: Machynys
Status: Offline
Points: 16813
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote reesytheexile Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 August 2023 at 9:58pm
Originally posted by Why Why wrote:

I will stand by the fact the post was moronic but apologise for calling TB a moron. I would suggest he comes with me to tact school as opposed to tackle school which as OF has proved is plainly useless. 

Clap 👍
Back to Top
scarletpimp View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 November 2015
Location: llanelli
Status: Offline
Points: 2079
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote scarletpimp Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 August 2023 at 11:03pm
Originally posted by Rob Hunt Rob Hunt wrote:

[QUOTE=Wil Chips]Ref gives a yellow.
Match day official adjudication raises it to red
Hearing reduces it to yellow.
Governing body try to reinstate the red.

World rugby sink below some African country electoral processes through this mess.



Or even below the USA if you believe Trump.





Two good posts  gents.
Alex Popham has just spoken about what Message the Farrell incident  sends to youngsters .
He has got away time and again,  with reckless play ,in and around the tackle area and the Wales v England game, was just another example..
He will continue to do the same,  unless he gets punished and banned,  just like a naughty schoolboy. 
As for the authorities, they are an embarrassment.
There has to be 100% clarity  now regarding head collisions and tackle technique.
Its the responsibility  of players and those running the game to ensure that potential  danger , with players, now athletes, fast , powerful and immensely strong. HEAD COLLISIONS COULD PROVE LIFE CHANGING  , AND EVEN FATAL. 
It's proven ,that brain injury and early onset dementia  can be caused by these collisions. 
The risk is huge.
I am a carer for my wife,  who has a form of early onset dementia,  and I have to most of the thinking  for both of us.
I also have a family member playing rugby at a high level,  ahd I worry that she could end up like her mum.

I love rugby ,and the Scarlets  are embedded in the very fabric of my DNA, but life goes on, after rugby. The sooner people deal,with individuals like Farrell, it will hopefully send a message  out to others, and we will make some progress. 
I don't think he is wilfully going out to hurt people, but that not the point.Owen Farrell has a poor tackle technique,  and needs some help and advice ,in contact area.He has to understand,  that this cannot continue  , because otherwise he must suffer the consequences , and face a lengthy  ban

I stood yer on tanner bank
Back to Top
ladram View Drop Down
Rambler
Rambler
Avatar

Joined: 08 April 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26555
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ladram Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2023 at 6:58am
Originally posted by scarletpimp scarletpimp wrote:

Originally posted by Rob Hunt Rob Hunt wrote:

[QUOTE=Wil Chips]Ref gives a yellow.
Match day official adjudication raises it to red
Hearing reduces it to yellow.
Governing body try to reinstate the red.

World rugby sink below some African country electoral processes through this mess.



Or even below the USA if you believe Trump.





Two good posts  gents.
Alex Popham has just spoken about what Message the Farrell incident  sends to youngsters .
He has got away time and again,  with reckless play ,in and around the tackle area and the Wales v England game, was just another example..
He will continue to do the same,  unless he gets punished and banned,  just like a naughty schoolboy. 
As for the authorities, they are an embarrassment.
There has to be 100% clarity  now regarding head collisions and tackle technique.
Its the responsibility  of players and those running the game to ensure that potential  danger , with players, now athletes, fast , powerful and immensely strong. HEAD COLLISIONS COULD PROVE LIFE CHANGING  , AND EVEN FATAL. 
It's proven ,that brain injury and early onset dementia  can be caused by these collisions. 
The risk is huge.
I am a carer for my wife,  who has a form of early onset dementia,  and I have to most of the thinking  for both of us.
I also have a family member playing rugby at a high level,  ahd I worry that she could end up like her mum.

I love rugby ,and the Scarlets  are embedded in the very fabric of my DNA, but life goes on, after rugby. The sooner people deal,with individuals like Farrell, it will hopefully send a message  out to others, and we will make some progress. 
I don't think he is wilfully going out to hurt people, but that not the point.Owen Farrell has a poor tackle technique,  and needs some help and advice ,in contact area.He has to understand,  that this cannot continue  , because otherwise he must suffer the consequences , and face a lengthy  ban

ClapClapClap
Back to Top
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 18334
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2023 at 11:47am
Originally posted by hoppy hoppy wrote:

World Rugby is expected to argue that Owen Farrell was guilty of a shoulder charge because his right arm was tucked as he made the tackle.
If that argument prevails, no mitigation can be applied and the card would return to red, leaving Farrell facing a ban

That was my understanding when I read the arguments surrounding this decision - if the tackle technique is flawed, then mitigation does not apply regardless of any 'change of direction' (invisible to nearly everyone in any case). 

It was a terrible decision to overturn the red card. I am also disgusted (though not surprised) by the 'boo-hoo' cries of Farrell's dad and the support form other English players and pundits.

A few other points:Pimp wrote:

I don't think he is wilfully going out to hurt people, but that not the point.Owen Farrell has a poor tackle technique,  and needs some help and advice 

but my understanding is that Farrell has already attended tackle school after a previous offence - if so, it din't do any good and he didn't learn his lesson. (I do agree that he is being aggressive but not 'deliberately' attempting to hurt players, though - those who do that are usually far more sneaky - he does it out in the open.)

Ah... I found this comment, comparing treatment of Farrell with that 10 week ban meted out to Moala for his tip-tackle, mentioned before:

It also feels more controversial in the context of both players' prior records. The tackle by Moala, albeit a bad one, is his first offence, while Farrell would have been facing his fourth ban for a high tackle and was unable to shave off a week as he did earlier this year by undertaking World Rugby's tackle school programme. 
So farrell has already served three bans and has already attended tackle school.

No wonder World Rugby appealed the decision - it is a disgrace.
“You cannot reason a man out of what he never reasoned himself into.” (Jonathan Swift)
Back to Top
scarletpimp View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 November 2015
Location: llanelli
Status: Offline
Points: 2079
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote scarletpimp Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2023 at 12:01pm
Originally posted by aber-fan aber-fan wrote:

Originally posted by hoppy hoppy wrote:

World Rugby is expected to argue that Owen Farrell was guilty of a shoulder charge because his right arm was tucked as he made the tackle.
If that argument prevails, no mitigation can be applied and the card would return to red, leaving Farrell facing a ban

That was my understanding when I read the arguments surrounding this decision - if the tackle technique is flawed, then mitigation does not apply regardless of any 'change of direction' (invisible to nearly everyone in any case). 

It was a terrible decision to overturn the red card. I am also disgusted (though not surprised) by the 'boo-hoo' cries of Farrell's dad and the support form other English players and pundits.

A few other points:Pimp wrote:

I don't think he is wilfully going out to hurt people, but that not the point.Owen Farrell has a poor tackle technique,  and needs some help and advice 

but my understanding is that Farrell has already attended tackle school after a previous offence - if so, it din't do any good and he didn't learn his lesson. (I do agree that he is being aggressive but not 'deliberately' attempting to hurt players, though - those who do that are usually far more sneaky - he does it out in the open.)

Ah... I found this comment, comparing treatment of Farrell with that 10 week ban meted out to Moala for his tip-tackle, mentioned before:

It also feels more controversial in the context of both players' prior records. The tackle by Moala, albeit a bad one, is his first offence, while Farrell would have been facing his fourth ban for a high tackle and was unable to shave off a week as he did earlier this year by undertaking World Rugby's tackle school programme. 
So farrell has already served three bans and has already attended tackle school.

No wonder World Rugby appealed the decision - it is a disgrace.
As usual, excellent  insight and contribution  from Aber.
I had no idea,he (Farrell), has already had help regarding  the poir tackle  technique linked to Previous incidents. 
Obviously,  you have to assess every decision  and case on its own merit, but surely,  with his history  anyone making a decision on a fresh incidents will surely have an extra later of context to add to the allready damnning evidence .
I stood yer on tanner bank
Back to Top
Seagultaf View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 27 May 2021
Location: Penclawdd
Status: Offline
Points: 502
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Seagultaf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2023 at 12:23pm
Originally posted by Why Why wrote:

I think he was treated leniently of course but they have made decision get on with it when will it end with WR appealing winning then Farrell appealing against the appeal. The only people who make money are the lawyers while the games admin and reputation is in tatters. 

England dropping him for todays game suggest to me that England now think that a ban is inevitable. They look to be trying to limit the effect of the ban by getting Saturday’s game included in any ban that Farrell receives.
Following the considerable level of attention this tawdry matter has received across the rugby world and the huge tide of negative public opinion it has generated, I would be surprised if England object to any ban Farrell receives after this appeal. 
Back to Top
GPR - Rochester View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 01 December 2014
Location: Rhydcymerau
Status: Offline
Points: 17595
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GPR - Rochester Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2023 at 1:24pm
Originally posted by aber-fan aber-fan wrote:

Originally posted by hoppy hoppy wrote:

World Rugby is expected to argue that Owen Farrell was guilty of a shoulder charge because his right arm was tucked as he made the tackle.
If that argument prevails, no mitigation can be applied and the card would return to red, leaving Farrell facing a ban

That was my understanding when I read the arguments surrounding this decision - if the tackle technique is flawed, then mitigation does not apply regardless of any 'change of direction' (invisible to nearly everyone in any case). 

It was a terrible decision to overturn the red card. I am also disgusted (though not surprised) by the 'boo-hoo' cries of Farrell's dad and the support form other English players and pundits.

A few other points:Pimp wrote:

I don't think he is wilfully going out to hurt people, but that not the point.Owen Farrell has a poor tackle technique,  and needs some help and advice 

but my understanding is that Farrell has already attended tackle school after a previous offence - if so, it din't do any good and he didn't learn his lesson. (I do agree that he is being aggressive but not 'deliberately' attempting to hurt players, though - those who do that are usually far more sneaky - he does it out in the open.)

Ah... I found this comment, comparing treatment of Farrell with that 10 week ban meted out to Moala for his tip-tackle, mentioned before:

It also feels more controversial in the context of both players' prior records. The tackle by Moala, albeit a bad one, is his first offence, while Farrell would have been facing his fourth ban for a high tackle and was unable to shave off a week as he did earlier this year by undertaking World Rugby's tackle school programme. 
So farrell has already served three bans and has already attended tackle school.

No wonder World Rugby appealed the decision - it is a disgrace.

I don't disagree with most of what you say Aber but I do disagree on what you are saying about Andy Farrell. The only comment I have heard him make is at yesterday's press conference when asked he immediately said he was not the man to offer an opinion as he was talking about his son. What he did go on to say is that the circus of a way this had been handled was a disgrace. Nothing controversial about that - it has been a disgrace & that is nothing to do with Owen Farrell or his dad. 
Back to Top
Seagultaf View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 27 May 2021
Location: Penclawdd
Status: Offline
Points: 502
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Seagultaf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2023 at 1:35pm
Really good article by Nigel Owen on Wales on Line about the Farrell incident, how he saw it and would have dealt with it, if he had been the ref on the day.

Back to Top
scarletpimp View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 November 2015
Location: llanelli
Status: Offline
Points: 2079
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote scarletpimp Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2023 at 1:54pm
Originally posted by Seagultaf Seagultaf wrote:

Really good article by Nigel Owen on Wales on Line about the Farrell incident, how he saw it and would have dealt with it, if he had been the ref on the day.


Thanks Seagultaf. Just read the article, and it's (the incident), is incredibly  well explained in a cool logical way, by Nigel Owens.
Clearly a ban to follow for Farrell  , surely.
The whole thing so badly handled. 
It's intresting  to note what Nigel has say about Owen Farrell ,as he has a lot of respect for him, as does Warren Gatland.
He is good player, but his incredibly strong competitive  character  is taking over , and leading to these  unfortunate  series of incidents,  which need to be stamped out .
Better for the game, and better for Farrell himself. 
I stood yer on tanner bank
Back to Top
GPR - Rochester View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 01 December 2014
Location: Rhydcymerau
Status: Offline
Points: 17595
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GPR - Rochester Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2023 at 2:12pm
Originally posted by scarletpimp scarletpimp wrote:

Originally posted by Seagultaf Seagultaf wrote:

Really good article by Nigel Owen on Wales on Line about the Farrell incident, how he saw it and would have dealt with it, if he had been the ref on the day.


Thanks Seagultaf. Just read the article, and it's (the incident), is incredibly  well explained in a cool logical way, by Nigel Owens.
Clearly a ban to follow for Farrell  , surely.
The whole thing so badly handled. 
It's intresting  to note what Nigel has say about Owen Farrell ,as he has a lot of respect for him, as does Warren Gatland.
He is good player, but his incredibly strong competitive  character  is taking over , and leading to these  unfortunate  series of incidents,  which need to be stamped out .
Better for the game, and better for Farrell himself. 

Now I have never been a great fan of Farrells. He clearly has his supporters as he has 100+ caps but he is not my idea of a 10 even in today's game. Neither is he a 12  where he has won many caps. I support Tigerburnie's view that Ford should be the starting 10 with Smith available to chase the game if needed. 
Back to Top
aber-fan View Drop Down
Veteran
Veteran
Avatar

Joined: 25 October 2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 18334
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote aber-fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2023 at 7:18pm
Originally posted by GPR - Rochester GPR - Rochester wrote:

Originally posted by aber-fan aber-fan wrote:

Originally posted by hoppy hoppy wrote:

World Rugby is expected to argue that Owen Farrell was guilty of a shoulder charge because his right arm was tucked as he made the tackle.
If that argument prevails, no mitigation can be applied and the card would return to red, leaving Farrell facing a ban

That was my understanding when I read the arguments surrounding this decision - if the tackle technique is flawed, then mitigation does not apply regardless of any 'change of direction' (invisible to nearly everyone in any case). 

It was a terrible decision to overturn the red card. I am also disgusted (though not surprised) by the 'boo-hoo' cries of Farrell's dad and the support form other English players and pundits.

A few other points:Pimp wrote:

I don't think he is wilfully going out to hurt people, but that not the point.Owen Farrell has a poor tackle technique,  and needs some help and advice 

but my understanding is that Farrell has already attended tackle school after a previous offence - if so, it din't do any good and he didn't learn his lesson. (I do agree that he is being aggressive but not 'deliberately' attempting to hurt players, though - those who do that are usually far more sneaky - he does it out in the open.)

Ah... I found this comment, comparing treatment of Farrell with that 10 week ban meted out to Moala for his tip-tackle, mentioned before:

It also feels more controversial in the context of both players' prior records. The tackle by Moala, albeit a bad one, is his first offence, while Farrell would have been facing his fourth ban for a high tackle and was unable to shave off a week as he did earlier this year by undertaking World Rugby's tackle school programme. 
So farrell has already served three bans and has already attended tackle school.

No wonder World Rugby appealed the decision - it is a disgrace.

I don't disagree with most of what you say Aber but I do disagree on what you are saying about Andy Farrell. The only comment I have heard him make is at yesterday's press conference when asked he immediately said he was not the man to offer an opinion as he was talking about his son. What he did go on to say is that the circus of a way this had been handled was a disgrace. Nothing controversial about that - it has been a disgrace & that is nothing to do with Owen Farrell or his dad. 

Thanks for that - the headline may have been misleading, as I thought it implied Farrell had defended his son's tackle. I would still be interested to know which part, exactly, Farrell senior thought was a 'disgrace'.

Was it:

1. the ref's chicken decision to only award a YC despite the clear evidence that it was a red?
2. the bunker decision to upgrade to a red?
3. the appeal decision to downgrade, or
4. world rugby's decision to appeal the appeal, or maybe
5. to do with any personal abuse for his son.

Obviously, if 5 then Farrell senior is right to complain.

If 2 or 4, he does not have a leg to stand on - IMO, of course. It is unfortunate that world rugby have been put in the position of needing to make that appeal, but if the review panel had taken the correct decision it would not have been necessary. I understand that England players are represented at these hearings by a very highly paid and experienced QC, who probably runs rings around the lesser brains on the panels... but crafty legal arguments should not be allowed to bamboozle such people from denying the evidence of their own eyes.
“You cannot reason a man out of what he never reasoned himself into.” (Jonathan Swift)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 6789>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.04
Copyright ©2001-2021 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.266 seconds.