RugbyRebels

For what it is worth, I think it was accidental. As far as I know Francis doesn't have any previous form for cheap shots, it doesn't seem in his nature. If you look at the video clip he goes into the ruck, turns his head slightly and closes his eyes. It also looks like his head is actually behind Coles (where the left side of the pitch with Wales attacking is to the front), so he can't actually see Coles face. Obviously he can see his head and can guess where his features are having said that.
To me it looks like he's going in and trying to grab part of Cole to clear him out. As he's got his eye's closed he can't see what he's grabbing and rakes his fingers across Coles face and ends up grabbing nothing. It looks far worse in slow motion, and I don't think I've seen a single full speed version to give it more context. I think the length of ban is a little harsh, but also agree that players need to take responsibility for where they place parts or their body so he can't complain too much. (so how Brown got away with his kicks to Murray I'll never know). Having said that, if he was French you could have probably doubled the ban and if he was from the Southern Hemisphere you could have could have halved it.
World Rugby is a joke and makes FIFA with all its corruption look organised!

P. S.
Francis deserved to have the ban doubled for going into the ruck with his eyes closed! MTFU

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Lord Llandaff wrote:Yes it was reckless, and a ban was expected but there is no consistency in the game - Mike Brown had about 4 attempts at raking Murray's face, did some real damage and wasn't even cited, and Francis gets 8 weeks. Neither player was looking what they were doing and either could have damaged an eye.

World Rugby truly is a joke.

It was obviously deliberate contact with the eye area. He wasn't trying to gouge out his eye in particular but he was clearly going for the eyes and trying to make life as uncomfortabl as possible. 8 weeks is much lighter than I'dlike it to be.

Saying it was 'obviously deliberate' is nothing but pure speculation.

Lord Llandaff wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Lord Llandaff wrote:Yes it was reckless, and a ban was expected but there is no consistency in the game - Mike Brown had about 4 attempts at raking Murray's face, did some real damage and wasn't even cited, and Francis gets 8 weeks. Neither player was looking what they were doing and either could have damaged an eye.

World Rugby truly is a joke.

It was obviously deliberate contact with the eye area. He wasn't trying to gouge out his eye in particular but he was clearly going for the eyes and trying to make life as uncomfortabl as possible. 8 weeks is much lighter than I'dlike it to be.

Saying it was 'obviously deliberate' is nothing but pure speculation.

No it's an inference drawn from observation. Speculation is when you have no facts on which to base the conclusion.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Lord Llandaff wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: It was obviously deliberate contact with the eye area. He wasn't trying to gouge out his eye in particular but he was clearly going for the eyes and trying to make life as uncomfortabl as possible. 8 weeks is much lighter than I'dlike it to be.

Saying it was 'obviously deliberate' is nothing but pure speculation.

No it's an inference drawn from observation. Speculation is when you have no facts on which to base the conclusion.

It's just your opinion, but as always you phrase it like it is fact.
How you can tell that he was clearly going for the eyes is beyond me and as usual I think you're talking guff!