RugbyRebels

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/36130239

Didn't expect Farrell citing Thought Poite dealt with it with the binning.

It can't be a surprise any of them are cited. McIntyre the most bang to rights, whereas Marler might get nothing if he didn't actually kick Heguy despite the attempt.

Digby wrote:It can't be a surprise any of them are cited. McIntyre the most bang to rights, whereas Marler might get nothing if he didn't actually kick Heguy despite the attempt.

I hope he does get a ban. He more 'shinned' him than kicked himbut it was stupid, he'd have got away with just pushing his head into the ground!
I have no love of Farrell but the more I've watched that I'd have to say it was unfortunate rather than malicious.

oldbackrow wrote:

Digby wrote:It can't be a surprise any of them are cited. McIntyre the most bang to rights, whereas Marler might get nothing if he didn't actually kick Heguy despite the attempt.

I hope he does get a ban. He more 'shinned' him than kicked himbut it was stupid, he'd have got away with just pushing his head into the ground!
I have no love of Farrell but the more I've watched that I'd have to say it was unfortunate rather than malicious.

I agree on Marler. Not sure about Farrell, for me if you want to take the risk of 'tackling' in such fashion then you're for it when it comes off that badly, so if you want to avoid bans don't play like that in the first place.

Am I right in saying that anything more than 4 weeks will see Marler miss a test in Oz? If Marler is banned and there's a Sarries - Wasps Prem final we could be really scraping the barrel for looseheads.

Edit: for the Wales game.

Timbo wrote:Am I right in saying that anything more than 4 weeks will see Marler miss a test in Oz? If Marler is banned and there's a Sarries - Wasps Prem final we could be really scraping the barrel for looseheads.

Edit: for the Wales game.

No idea where we are on the rankings but losing to Wales could potentially see us as 2nd seeds going into the next WC, which perhaps we'd deserve for arranging such an absurd fixture.

McIntyre bang to rights. Think his season's over, and he may have cost himself a place on the Saxons tour too.

Farrell's tackle was reckless regardless of Robson ducking. Imagine he'll get a one week van (not that it'll bother Sarries much against Newcastle)

McIntyre should have had a red so a ban is inevitable, even though I have some sympathy for him as he was being held. Still, cant take the law into your own hands.

Marler was a dick so he should get another rest. It was hardly a shattering blow, but if you aim a strike at an opponents head you've got expect some comeback.

Farrell is borderline. It was a bit harebrained but the mitigation will be that Robson ducked into it a bit.

He'll probably get off, even though he caused a player to be subbed. Irony is that the other 2 will probably get bans despite no lasting damage to the players on the ground.

I've no axe to grind but I'm not so sure McIntyre necessarily kicked out deliberately to make contact with Itoje's head as so many are saying. One leg was held and in trying to stay on his feet he had to use the other leg as a counterbalance. I think it looked worse than it was.

Both props to be rested, no argument on that. Farrell cleared as an unfortunate incident rather than malicious intent.

p/d wrote:Both props to be rested, no argument on that. Farrell cleared as an unfortunate incident rather than malicious intent.

Should Marler get a ban for the attempt even if there's not really any connection?

And I doubt anyone thinks Farrell was malicious, but his action was risky so he should be pick up something for being reckless - might be as little as one week which could see him miss the big one against Newcastle. I don't see how Watson gets a ban for something that is an accident, or at least has sufficient cover to be an accident, and another gets away with a dangerous/reckless play

Digby wrote:I don't see how Watson gets a ban for something that is an accident, or at least has sufficient cover to be an accident, and another gets away with a dangerous/reckless play

This.

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:I don't see how Watson gets a ban for something that is an accident, or at least has sufficient cover to be an accident, and another gets away with a dangerous/reckless play

This.

aye, I actually thought Faz reacted to him falling down and just followed him without a thought as to consequence....red mist imo

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:I don't see how Watson gets a ban for something that is an accident, or at least has sufficient cover to be an accident, and another gets away with a dangerous/reckless play

This.

aye, I actually thought Faz reacted to him falling down and just followed him without a thought as to consequence....red mist imo

That's how I saw it as well, if hed stayed on his previous path Robsons head would've probably hit Farrells belly/lower chest and not been such an impact.

I hope they all get a ban.

Doorzetbornandbred wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:
This.

aye, I actually thought Faz reacted to him falling down and just followed him without a thought as to consequence....red mist imo

That's how I saw it as well, if hed stayed on his previous path Robsons head would've probably hit Farrells belly/lower chest and not been such an impact.

His previous path was upright, in which case he'd have tackled Robsons head with his testicles.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Doorzetbornandbred wrote:

Banquo wrote: aye, I actually thought Faz reacted to him falling down and just followed him without a thought as to consequence....red mist imo

That's how I saw it as well, if hed stayed on his previous path Robsons head would've probably hit Farrells belly/lower chest and not been such an impact.

His previous path was upright, in which case he'd have tackled Robsons head with his testicles.

Ah. The teabag tackle.

morepork wrote:

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

Doorzetbornandbred wrote:
That's how I saw it as well, if hed stayed on his previous path Robsons head would've probably hit Farrells belly/lower chest and not been such an impact.

His previous path was upright, in which case he'd have tackled Robsons head with his testicles.

Ah. The teabag tackle.

Let flavour flood out.

Epaminondas Pules wrote:

morepork wrote:
Ah. The teabag tackle.

Let flavour flood out.

..and of course the last teabag chimp just died. Probably take that into consideration too. Farrel might be in trouble here - folks don't like to see chimps die.

I thought that you would like this...

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featured ... die-jones/

...but, as the man said, not a lot.

CONVEX HULL wrote:I thought that you would like this...

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featured ... die-jones/

...but, as the man said, not a lot.

European player of the year? Marler. He's a shoeing. Sorry, shoo in.

Bit late for April Fool's Eddie.

Do the Aussies do it on the 26th?

WaspInWales wrote:Bit late for April Fool's Eddie.

Do the Aussies do it on the 26th?

You'll notice how he never actually says anything remotely like the headline though. If you only read the actual quotes, tgen his utterancea are relatively defensible.

Puja

Well today's the day... place your bets: Farrell no case to answer for best in Europe/Marler 4 weeks/McIntyre 4 weeks.

http://www.premiershiprugby.com/news/39 ... 8HcTig2.97