I hope farrell appeals against his 2 match ban

yes i know he's spikey, and unloved. but i dont care about any of that. there is ZERO consistency in these decision during matches and in fact after at the citing board. Itoje's retrospective yellow for example. never in a million years would he have been given a yellow for that when sarries were in an attacking position, yet apparently getting kicked in the neck means itoje deserved a yellow? what?

i watched the game in real time and it was a head on head collission between Farrell and Robson. now i watch the clip again, not only is it head on head, but robson drops the ball and bends to re-catch it before it hits the ground. there is NO WAY that is a red card offense. i question whether it was even a yellow.

http://www.worldrugbyvids.com/index.php/2016/04/24/farrell-robson-incident/

and Robson clearly didnt think it was a deliberate swinging arm or whatever reason they decided it should have been red...farrell almost had his ear ripped off.

https://twitter.com/d_jrobson/status/724173789534277632

He'd already put in one high tackle and been penalised, he'd put in a another before that which hadn't been picked up.

It seems that every game he had to it in at least one late/high tackle so tbh I think he deserves this, let's hope he learns something from it

As a neutral watching the game it looked a really bad tackle.

yappysnap wrote:He'd already put in one high tackle and been penalised, he'd put in a another before that which hadn't been picked up.

It seems that every game he had to it in at least one late/high tackle so tbh I think he deserves this, let's hope he learns something from it

citings cannot be for cumulative offenses. a citing can only be for a single offense deemed worthy of a red card.

my point is not to defend farrell at all. rather, wtf is going on with citings and consistent application of the laws? its getting ridiculously random.

Farrell's challenge was as bad as McFadden's so if he appeals maybe they'll be consistent and give him three weeks?

In film-making, there's someone on set called a script supervisor. Their job is to maintain continuity. They say things like "You can't wear blue, you were wearing red in this scene yesterday" and "We've already said she's an orphan, so that can't be her mother on the phone".

I wonder whether governing bodies might consider having a similar supervisor for disciplinary decisions.

On the day, referees might miss a lot, or just be prepared to let stuff go, in the interests of the game. Once a citing officer gets involved, and a panel convened, we are supposed to be getting a definitive view of what the laws allow. If inconsistencies in judgements abound, then we don't get a coherent story about where the boundaries are.

The Great Aukster wrote:Farrell's challenge was as bad as McFadden's so if he appeals maybe they'll be consistent and give him three weeks?

He was given 2 weeks, then they added 1 due to WR instructions and took 1 off for good behaviour.

Now as this is the 3rd such high tackle he has been found guilty of in less than a year (Watson in AP final 2015, retrospective YC given; Giteau in RWC, YC given) there is every chance an appeal could see a longer sentence and cause Farrell to miss the ECC final.

I think Farrells case wasn't helped by him almost reaching back after he was shooting past Robson and pulling on the head

Itoje yellow carded for getting kicked in the head? What are you going on about, you do realise you can't hold onto players like that at the ruck?

marty2086 wrote:I think Farrells case wasn't helped by him almost reaching back after he was shooting past Robson and pulling on the head

Itoje yellow carded for getting kicked in the head? What are you going on about, you do realise you can't hold onto players like that at the ruck?

give me a single example where a player holding on like itoje did received a yellow card.

presumably then you think toner and SoB should get yellow cards every game when they stand past the ruck and hold players attempting to join it? is exactly the same.

penalty only in both cases.

LondonTiger wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Farrell's challenge was as bad as McFadden's so if he appeals maybe they'll be consistent and give him three weeks?

He was given 2 weeks, then they added 1 due to WR instructions and took 1 off for good behaviour.

Now as this is the 3rd such high tackle he has been found guilty of in less than a year (Watson in AP final 2015, retrospective YC given; Giteau in RWC, YC given) there is every chance an appeal could see a longer sentence and cause Farrell to miss the ECC final.

yes, but i dont think it was a high tackle. if robson dives down to pick up the ball he fumbled is farrell supposed to surf along the grass to make his tackle?

it may have caused a concussion. but it wasnt a "high tackle". nor did the committee say it was. they said it was a dangerous tackle.

which i disagree with. the concussion was caused by a clash of heads when robson ducked down to re-catch the ball he fumbled.

i can understand if others see it differently. but i hope he appeals as i think he's got a very decent chance of overturning it. because the other tackles in that game or prior games are completely irrelevant to making a determination that this particular one was dangerous. the IRB book says you cant add up incidents. they have to be considered in isolation.

He was charged with a dangerous tackle - my mistake to call it high. Swinging arm with no attempt to grab the man that is aimed relatively high has become a pattern. Farrell has the potential to be a very good international player for another two world cups - but needs to remove this element from his game.

totally agree with what you said about farrell. he appears petulant and petty. which takes away from what a great season he is having. bit like marler and hartley. they let people focus on the wrong stuff.

and i'm not defending him either.

i'm just getting frustrated by the complete lack of consistency by the citing officer and the disciplinary committee. they have no excuse. i understand and sympathise with refs missing things. but the committee needs to be completely consistent and i just dont think they are any more.

maybe the french league overturning the EPCR ruling for their player so he could play domestically in top14 has impacted on their processes. i dont know.

quinsforever wrote:

marty2086 wrote:I think Farrells case wasn't helped by him almost reaching back after he was shooting past Robson and pulling on the head

Itoje yellow carded for getting kicked in the head? What are you going on about, you do realise you can't hold onto players like that at the ruck?

give me a single example where a player holding on like itoje did received a yellow card.

presumably then you think toner and SoB should get yellow cards every game when they stand past the ruck and hold players attempting to join it? is exactly the same.

penalty only in both cases.

I've seen a few given for it but can't remember names and occasions off the top of my head

I see you went for Irish players there, nice attempt, both are fouls but when you stop a guy joining the defensive line getting close to the try line it carries greater weight when it comes to penalties and ounishment

Personally I do not think that Farrell meant it but it does look very reckless and has been adjudged so. He can feel hard done by for the two week ban but hopefully this will get him to tighten up a bit as he can be a very loose cannon.

marty2086 wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

marty2086 wrote:I think Farrells case wasn't helped by him almost reaching back after he was shooting past Robson and pulling on the head

Itoje yellow carded for getting kicked in the head? What are you going on about, you do realise you can't hold onto players like that at the ruck?

give me a single example where a player holding on like itoje did received a yellow card.

presumably then you think toner and SoB should get yellow cards every game when they stand past the ruck and hold players attempting to join it? is exactly the same.

penalty only in both cases.

I've seen a few given for it but can't remember names and occasions off the top of my head

I see you went for Irish players there, nice attempt, both are fouls but when you stop a guy joining the defensive line getting close to the try line it carries greater weight when it comes to penalties and ounishment

the ball was gone wide from the ruck. thats why the ref saw neither the hold nor the kick. mcintyre was in the defensive line. he was behind the back foot, at the side of the ruck.

people hold players ALL THE TIME at rucks and scrums. it never leads to a yellow if it has no bearing on a try-scoring opportunity

quinsforever wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

marty2086 wrote:I think Farrells case wasn't helped by him almost reaching back after he was shooting past Robson and pulling on the head

Itoje yellow carded for getting kicked in the head? What are you going on about, you do realise you can't hold onto players like that at the ruck?

give me a single example where a player holding on like itoje did received a yellow card.

presumably then you think toner and SoB should get yellow cards every game when they stand past the ruck and hold players attempting to join it? is exactly the same.

penalty only in both cases.

I've seen a few given for it but can't remember names and occasions off the top of my head

I see you went for Irish players there, nice attempt, both are fouls but when you stop a guy joining the defensive line getting close to the try line it carries greater weight when it comes to penalties and ounishment

the ball was gone wide from the ruck. thats why the ref saw neither the hold nor the kick. mcintyre was in the defensive line. he was behind the back foot, at the side of the ruck.

people hold players ALL THE TIME at rucks and scrums. it never leads to a yellow if it has no bearing on a try-scoring opportunity

If you say so, it seems you are happy to make things up to suit whatever point you are trying to make. Farrell is hard done by? That's makes one for the times he got away with it, call it karma or him just getting