RugbyRebels

morepork wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:25 pm Thanks dry balls.

as the master of fast wit and repartee once said....

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:29 pm

morepork wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:25 pm Thanks dry balls.

The internet version of a petulant shoulder to the head.

More like a sneaky digit in the anus.

morepork wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:34 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:29 pm

morepork wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:25 pm Thanks dry balls.

The internet version of a petulant shoulder to the head.

More like a sneaky digit in the anus.

ooh, cheeky boy.

I’m reading people explaining the maths of the likely ban for Farrell and I just can’t compute him missing the Japan/Arg games. The only other option is him being cleared completely?

Can that happen under this new system with the 10 minute review? Does that undermine the whole process?

Biggar (and Sexton) are clearly gobshites equal to Farrell. The difference is that neither takes shots at opponents heads. Time and time again.

I think England are a better team without Farrell so I'm conflicted. i think there's a lot wrong with the disciplinary system. I do wonder if he CAN be replaced in the RWC squad. Has Borthers actually submitted it to world rugby?

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2023 11:59 pm I’m reading people explaining the maths of the likely ban for Farrell and I just can’t compute him missing the Japan/Arg games. The only other option is him being cleared completely?

Can that happen under this new system with the 10 minute review? Does that undermine the whole process?

It can and gods only know that the Wheel of Disciplinary action can absolutely spin to a random number. The 10 minute review thing is just the same as the old TMO situation, just without everyone having to sit around and wait with them, so they could absolutely acquit him if he pleads not guilty and eats biscuits really nicely.

However, he'd be mad to plead not guilty. He loses all mitigation if he does that and likely goes down for 6-8 weeks, so I reckon he'll be pleading guilty, angling for it being considered a low-end offence (don't know how it could be that, but he's got good lawyers) and reducing it down to a 3 week ban.

Anyone know when the hearing will be?

Puja

Whatever his other faults, Farrell is a pretty slow learner isn’t he?

Lizard wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 4:29 am Whatever his other faults, Farrell is a pretty slow learner isn’t he?

Since his last ban was just before the 6N for a very similar offence on Glaws Clement, I'd suggest he's been ignoring the tackling advice coming his way.

He got four weeks down to 3 with the tackling course back then. I'd be surprised if this is less than four or maybe I wouldn't because it's a captain and the world cup. 2 week ban incoming.

If Farrell got a week's reduction last time for agreeing to do the tackle course and he has quickly re-offended (showing his contempt for what he was supposed to learn), surely that contempt should add at least a week to the 6 week basic punishment. Add on his 'persistent offender' characteristic and he should get a minimum 8 weeks.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 8:29 am If Farrell got a week's reduction last time for agreeing to do the tackle course and he has quickly re-offended (showing his contempt for what he was supposed to learn), surely that contempt should add at least a week to the 6 week basic punishment. Add on his 'persistent offender' characteristic and he should get a minimum 8 weeks.

agreed, and in which case, he shouldn't be in the squad.

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 8:42 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 8:29 am If Farrell got a week's reduction last time for agreeing to do the tackle course and he has quickly re-offended (showing his contempt for what he was supposed to learn), surely that contempt should add at least a week to the 6 week basic punishment. Add on his 'persistent offender' characteristic and he should get a minimum 8 weeks.

agreed, and in which case, he shouldn't be in the squad.

Making the logic fit your desired outcome. I like it, gents!

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 9:23 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 8:42 am

Oakboy wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 8:29 am If Farrell got a week's reduction last time for agreeing to do the tackle course and he has quickly re-offended (showing his contempt for what he was supposed to learn), surely that contempt should add at least a week to the 6 week basic punishment. Add on his 'persistent offender' characteristic and he should get a minimum 8 weeks.

agreed, and in which case, he shouldn't be in the squad.

Making the logic fit your desired outcome. I like it, gents!

If it helps to dampen expectations at all, Zander Fagerson just got a conveniently reduced ban for charging in to a ruck and making head contact, an infringement he’s committed in basically every game he’s ever played.

I’m convinced Farrell will be ever present for England this World Cup.

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 9:38 am

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 9:23 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 8:42 am

agreed, and in which case, he shouldn't be in the squad.

Making the logic fit your desired outcome. I like it, gents!

If it helps to dampen expectations at all, Zander Fagerson just got a conveniently reduced ban for charging in to a ruck and making head contact, an infringement he’s committed in basically every game he’s ever played.

I’m convinced Farrell will be ever present for England this World Cup.

MB, you are just trying to cheer us up presumably.

As he alludes to, this is some serious straw grasping stuff but…

Every time I watch that clip my level of dislike towards Bigger grows

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:14 am Every time I watch that clip my level of dislike towards Bigger grows

Does your dislike get Biggar and Biggar?

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:11 am As he alludes to, this is some serious straw grasping stuff but…

Surely that's overridden by the fact that he's got a tucked arm, so he was never trying to make a legal tackle? I thought in that case, it couldn't get mitigated down?

It'd be a nonsense call anyway, as Basham moves barely a milimetre downwards and Farrell has clear sight on him all the way. However, that is now what I expect to happen - the IRB will absolutely bottle it because they want to keep the "star" in the competition.

Puja

Anyone know when the hearing will be?

Puja

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:20 am

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:14 am Every time I watch that clip my level of dislike towards Bigger grows

Does your dislike get Biggar and Biggar?

‘A’ it does

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:23 am

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:11 am As he alludes to, this is some serious straw grasping stuff but…

Surely that's overridden by the fact that he's got a tucked arm, so he was never trying to make a legal tackle? I thought in that case, it couldn't get mitigated down?

It'd be a nonsense call anyway, as Basham moves barely a milimetre downwards and Farrell has clear sight on him all the way. However, that is now what I expect to happen - the IRB will absolutely bottle it because they want to keep the "star" in the competition.

Puja

Yep. It could be the ‘mitigation’ WR will desperately be looking for but it’s bs.

Can George be cited for ‘in the act of pushing a player he caused the head of said player to make contact with the shoulder of Mr Farrell who was, at the time, distracted by a third white seat being placed next to Mr Genge’

p/d wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 11:07 am Can George be cited for ‘in the act of pushing a player he caused the head of said player to make contact with the shoulder of Mr Farrell who was, at the time, distracted by a third white seat being placed next to Mr Genge’

Losing George would be a much bigger loss than Farrell. We don't have a better hooker, we have at least one obviously better flyhalf.

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:23 am

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:11 am As he alludes to, this is some serious straw grasping stuff but…

Surely that's overridden by the fact that he's got a tucked arm, so he was never trying to make a legal tackle? I thought in that case, it couldn't get mitigated down?

It'd be a nonsense call anyway, as Basham moves barely a milimetre downwards and Farrell has clear sight on him all the way. However, that is now what I expect to happen - the IRB will absolutely bottle it because they want to keep the "star" in the competition.

Puja

It’s a clear red and Farrell should be in trouble. I expect a fudge though given the recent Sexton decision

Puja wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:23 am

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:11 am As he alludes to, this is some serious straw grasping stuff but…

Surely that's overridden by the fact that he's got a tucked arm, so he was never trying to make a legal tackle? I thought in that case, it couldn't get mitigated down?

It'd be a nonsense call anyway, as Basham moves barely a milimetre downwards and Farrell has clear sight on him all the way. However, that is now what I expect to happen - the IRB will absolutely bottle it because they want to keep the "star" in the competition.

Puja

I expect that millimetre will result in a ban for Basham for bringing Farrell into disrepute.