England quality? Give me a break....

Yesterday, Leicester Tigers took to the field to face Northampton Saints. The game ended up with Leicester winning and proceeding to the play off final. But the repercussions of this game, have for me anyway, brought up some interesting points.

Firstly, the referee made a bad call regarding the sin binning of both Tuilagi and Ashton. Now, in this instance I don't blame the ref at all, as he was merely going on the call of the touch judge who recommended the decision to sin bin both men. He is certainly the one who got the decision wrong. Plain and simple, Tuilagi made a off the ball tackle (if you can even call it that) and Ashton responded with a shove back

What transpired next is hard to believe.

you tube link

Tuilagi viciously assaulted Ashton. There is no excuse for it at all and I very much doubt anyone ever would try to. It was a piece of thuggery not seen on the television outside of a boxing ring. How the touch judge missed the aggressor is unbelievable. But he did. Which leads me onto a question for the governing body.

In a day and age where video technology has improved the game immensely, how on earth could Tuilagi be allowed to come back on. Even though he was dealt with at the time, why couldnt the video ref have sent a signal to say, "you got it wrong - its a red". The guy is already off the pitch so its not changing the game at that point but what a difference it would have made to the outcome.

In football, there are strict rules about retrospective action and the use of video evidence. If a ref has issued a card that is it. Rugby is better than that though. And surely if evidence that comes to light can be used during the action, it should be. It was clear cut. So come on RFU - sort it out. Make sure this doesnt happen again.

So what happens next to Tuilagi? Should he be considered for England? In this posters opinion - No.

We all have rushes of blood occasionally, but any call up in the immediate future, will cause the England set up to lose all credibility. A game based on honour in the way it is played being sullied by a player who acts like a common thug. How could you have him and Ashton in the same squad? Yes I know they shook hands at the end of the game (and credit to Ashton for that) but there is no doubt than when Chris sees the footage again, he will get mad. Real mad.

The English football team dropped John Terry for less but then again they still select the likes of Gerrard and Terry who arent exactly great role models. Rugby is better than that though and so it should be.

So should he be banned from England for good?

Once again, its a no from me. He has committed the crime but everyone makes mistakes. But I think England should make an example of him and tell him that he has a 12 month international ban and that all players wanting to play for their country should look at the punishment and learn. They kid has bags of talent but if he can't change his ways, he will become a target.

I hope you show remorse, Manu. And I hope you take whatever punishment that comes your way, with the dignity you didn't show yesterday

I don't think he should be banned from england for good, but certainly a lengthy ban is what is needed. However it will be such a shame not to see him in the world cup. So chances are he will get a ban which lasts until before the first warm up game in august. Remember he was only a school boy six months ago ( I watched playing for truro college in the daily mail under 18 final a couple of years ago).

I would also worried about the tendency for referees and touch judges to ignore aggravating behaviour until a player retaliates. Then that player gets binned. Although you can't condone hitting out, etc, it is unjust that after being driven demented by mockery, pushes, etc that they end up in hot water. I feel that any disrespectful or aggravating behaviour should be punished by penalty reversals, etc.

Absolutely agree that the video referee could be used. The only problem is where do you draw the line. If he calls up every foul he sees, well then why have an on-field referee. Maybe it should be the case that when serious foul play or fights occur, the referee can ask the TMO what he can see on the cameras and ask for a recommendation.

I had to laugh at the suggestion in the video that it was the worst decision of the season. The commentators clearly weren't watching the Six Nations.

Jeremy Guscott very kindly tweeted a link to this article. Below are some of the comments that were made by JG and other posters on Twitter.

Thanks everyone!

@JeremyGuscott
Jeremy Guscott
@606v2rugby no way can video be used during matches for these offences. there's so much that goes on in rucks & mauls where does it end?

@606v2rugby
606v2 Rugby
@JeremyGuscott For off the ball incidents where they are sin binned its ideal as it doesnt effect the flow. Manu not back and justice done

JeremyGuscott Jeremy Guscott
@
@606v2rugby still feel it should be left to the citing officer, refs decisions stand during the game.

@JeremyGuscott
Jeremy Guscott
@606v2rugby being cited after the match is sufficient enough

@CarlosDurban
Carl Durban
@606v2rugby @JeremyGuscott Good to hear your views. Watched it with my 12yo son, we're both players and he was quite shocked. #holtrfc

JeremyGuscott Jeremy Guscott
@
@CarlosDurban @606v2rugby not surprised everyone was, it's not what rugby is about, it happens tho. it's not the first or last time.

CarlosDurban Carl Durban
@
@JeremyGuscott @606v2rugby We've all been there, it's a physical game but it's also about respect. There's also no escape from tv.

@CarlosDurban
Carl Durban
@606v2rugby @JeremyGuscott Rugby is a leader when it comes to discipline, they need to continue to lead by example. #rugby #holtrfc

JeremyGuscott Jeremy Guscott
@
@CarlosDurban @606v2rugby hopefully for his future in rugby he will learn a hard lesson when he's banned

@mylesveritas
Andrew Jackson
@606v2rugby @JeremyGuscott Manu seems like a great player with level head. That was indefensible. 6mth ban and hope he learns + sets example

The trouble with reviewing the yellow cards while the players are binned in this instance is whether the TMO would/should recommend that Ashton was let back on. His shove was not a yellow card offence (but should have resulted in a penalty reversal if the Tuilagi late hit had been penalised.) Where do you stop? What about Castrogiovanni's slap/tap on Hartley. The TMO sees a flanker hold back the scrum half (can't remember what game that was now).

The long and the short of this is that the assistant referee (and that what he is, not a touch judge) has made an massive error. I would expect the RFU to demote him and I doubt if you'll see him on the national panel again.

Should Tuilagi play for England? In the short-term, no. The RFU should ban him long enough to miss the warm up games so that there is no pressure the England management to play him.

Nice and well reasoned comment

I just think that when such an injustice has been done, that it shouldnt be ignored. Yes there will be always other cases that can be sited but this was the first half of the game and the incident was so blatant.

Even if it had been done at half time, by showing the ref the footage, it should be allowed.

What I would hate to see is for rugby to be worried about making unpopular decisions due to rules. In the football world cup, a goal for Argentina that was clearly offside, was given. The stadium producer showed it on the big screen, and the ref knew that it shouldnt have been a goal but couldnt do anything.

Refs should be allowed to correct obvious mistakes - this was obvious.

I hope you are right and that touch judge is punished.

Welcome to the forum by the way!

Hobo - if you are talking about football and the World Cup, what about the goal that England "scored" against Germany that was disallowed even though it was about a yard over the line? That's one of the worst I have seen.

Back in rugby, the problem with reviewing at half time is two-fold. Firstly why should something that happens in the first half be more under review than something that happens in the second. A missed red card decision in the first half could result in a red card being issued at half time, which will impact the game. In contrast a missed red card at the start of the second half will not get reviewed until after the game. I don't think that is a good situation.

The second problem is where do you draw the line. Can you remove a try or that has been scored because the attacking team obstructed the tackler for example? Or can you award a penalty try because the defending team clearly trip the player about to score, when seen with the benefit of the TV?

If you are going to allow the TMO to adjudicate on off the ball incidents I think it really has to on the spot, on the request of the referee or else not at all.

Schrodinger's Cat wrote:If you are going to allow the TMO to adjudicate on off the ball incidents I think it really has to on the spot, on the request of the referee or else not at all.

I think that is the answer actually - is there a precedent of the TMO being used over a dust up?

Sadly it looks like the youtube video has been removed

Hobo wrote:

Schrodinger's Cat wrote:If you are going to allow the TMO to adjudicate on off the ball incidents I think it really has to on the spot, on the request of the referee or else not at all.

I think that is the answer actually - is there a precedent of the TMO being used over a dust up?

Not as far as I know, but it would be a good idea I feel. Really any incident which doesn't occur in the course of play, i.e. off the ball, etc should be able to be checked. Also build-up to tries should be allowed to be checked so that obvious mistakes can be picked up. Marginal calls in open play leading to tries should stick with the referee so that his authority isn't eroded, much as the referral system in cricket keeps the on-field call if it's close.

have updated the link again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vZBjqRzZOM

Going back to the original topic.

Should he be banned? Yes. You can't go around punching people like that and get away with it, he should have been sent off, and should get at least a five or six week ban IMO. He also shouldn't be picked for England in the near future (regardless of whether he could or not). If this is how he reacts to a small shove in high pressure situations, can't you see teams targeting him at the RWC? I certainly can...

Should he be banned from England for good? I think this is an utterly preposterous suggestion TBH. The guys lost his rag, threw a few punches. Didn't injure anyone? Ashton didn't seem to mind too much judging from his reaction at the end of the game; You can't decide someone can't represent his country ever for this IMO. He'd hardly be the first international to have punched someone would he?

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Should he be banned from England for good? I think this is an utterly preposterous suggestion TBH. The guys lost his rag, threw a few punches. Didn't injure anyone? Ashton didn't seem to mind too much judging from his reaction at the end of the game; You can't decide someone can't represent his country ever for this IMO. He'd hardly be the first international to have punched someone would he?

You wouldn't have anyone left to play international rugby if getting involved in off the ball incidents excluded you. I would imagine nearly every player gets involved in one at some stage.

Hobo, I think the system we have right now works. I think the officials made the mistake of letting Tuilagi remain on the field when it was really a red card offence.

But incidents of this nature are generally dealt with very harshly, and they need to be as well, post-match. I have to agree with all the points raised by Jeremy Guscott. We don't want to bring video officiating into the game for incidents in open play; the officials we have should be sufficient. Obviously they miss things but players do not get away with it in televised matches. Tuilagi will get a lengthy ban- justice will be served.

As for England, we all make mistakes. Tuilagi did something which has no place on a sports pitch and could be facing a while away from the game. But everyone deserves a second chance and he'll get his.

Notch wrote: Tuilagi will get a lengthy ban- justice will be served.

.

but it wont - they most probably wouldnt have won if he had been red carded.

Maybe I was being a bit over zealous with my original comments but I do think that the TMO should get involved if a player has been sin binned. Review the incident whilst he is in there and decide whether he should be allowed back

"but it wont - they most probably wouldnt have won if he had been red carded".

Prove it, Hobo. Just speculation.

I think Tigers would have won with 14 men on the field. They were just better all over the park and Saints were knackered by half time.

There you go - two entirely different viewpoints. Can we move on now please?

Of course I cant prove it but its more than likely the game would have swung in the Saints favour.

I think a stat was given during the 6N that during a sin bin, the other team scores on average 9 points. What does that do to a red card in the first halfs stats.

Of course we will never know but surely you cant disagree that he should have been off.

As a matter of interest - what do you think the punishment will be and should be?

You could apply that argument to every decision the officials make but it's the way of the game. Sh!t happens, stuff gets missed and that's just the way sport is. Unlucky for the Saints but if you can't win 15 on 15 then you can't really complain.

Similarly, when Ireland lost to Wales in the Six Nations it was to a try that shouldn't have been allowed but we had something like 25 minutes to find a score and we simply could not- so we didn't deserve to win. Saints were well beaten in that semi-final, could it have gone differently? Maybe but that's just the way it goes.