With the Rugby World Cup (RWC) now almost upon us, the world is, as the famous tune goes, in union.
This time though, the galvanising force is not an emotive song associated with the quadrennial rugby jamboree, but England’s recidivist captain Owen Farrell.
The rugby world appears united in their condemnation of his shoulder first tackle and the farcical disciplinary process that followed.
Current and former players enthusiastically voiced their displeasure at the outcome of the disciplinary hearing that crucially was convened under the aegis of Six Nations, not World Rugby.
Farrell, if you haven’t seen it, last week charged shoulder first into Wales ball carrier Taine Basham in the teams’ RWC warm-up match at Twickenham.
Basham was forced to leave the field, Farrell was yellow-carded but that was later upgraded to red during the so-called Bunker Review System in which the television match official has 10 minutes to determine whether the player sitting on the side can return to play, or head for the showers.
Farrell was sent to the taps and as he disappeared down the Twickenham tunnel the overwhelming sentiment was that he had a torrent heading his way.
Rescinding Farrell’s red card was a kick in the head on many fronts. The disciplinary panel effectively undermined World Rugby’s new Bunker Review System, which was specifically instituted to help match officials arrive at the right decision.
The expectation was that the book was going to be thrown at him. The disciplinary panel certainly had overwhelming evidence to do so. Farrell is a repeat offender, he did not use his arms, made head contact and did not make an attempt to lower his position.
In fact, he seemed to move his body upwards placing the speeding Basham in even greater peril.
Instead of the book heading Farrell’s way, the RFU’s legal representative, who is particularly adept at finding favourable verdicts despite a growing body count, again pulled a rabbit out of the hat.
The panel argued that there had been “a late change in dynamics” after England hooker Jamie George pushed Basham into Farrell. They wrote George’s actions “brought about a sudden and significant change in direction from the ball carrier”.
Instead of banning Farrell, who has been banned three times for similar infractions, for four to six weeks as was widely expected, the all-Australian disciplinary panel decided to rescind the red card.
The outcry has been so vehement that World Rugby has opted to appeal that decision placing Farrell’s RWC hopes in jeopardy again.
They had to, for fear of being the sporting world’s laughing stock.
The disciplinary panel’s decision had kicked World Rugby’s initiatives to make rugby a safer sport in the teeth. They have amended the laws of the game to place player welfare front and centre. They want rugby to be seen as proactive in stamping out foul play, especially when it comes to head injuries.
The game’s governing body is already in the dock as different groupings of former players have brought class action proceedings for the organisation’s failure to warn players of the dangers the game posed, especially in relation to head injuries.
Rescinding Farrell’s red card was a kick in the head on many fronts. The disciplinary panel effectively undermined World Rugby’s new Bunker Review System, which was specifically instituted to help match officials arrive at the right decision when yellow cards are issued. It gives the match officials enough time and scope to arrive at the right decision.
What the Farrell case has also done is expose the divide in the game’s haves and have nots. England, and other northern hemisphere power brokers, are able to bury the game’s disciplinary processes in legalese. It serves to obfuscate at a time there can be no ambiguity about player safety and what peril it holds for the game’s future.
Given the current climate, would I encourage my child participate in rugby? No!
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.