Show the rule book a red card
Garces rap highlights farce
RUGBY’s disciplinary system continues to undermine the sport. areas of zero tolerance on the field are supposed to co-exist with random acts of judicial leniency when offences are punished.
Yesterday saNZaaR, the governing body for the Rugby Championship in the southern hemisphere, announced that French referee Jerome Garces had been wrong to send off springbok centre Damian de allende, whose side lost narrowly to the all Blacks. He was judged to have used excessive force in a late collision with Lima sopoaga, the New Zealand fly-half.
It looked like a harsh verdict and that is how saNZaaR reviewed it. But the problem is not Garces. the problem is the hard- line edicts which are passed down to on-field officials. Rugby’s authorities want to eradicate incidents which threaten to exacerbate the concussion crisis, but implementing their policies is a messy and haphazard business.
thousands of miles from Cape town, at the Rec, Freddie Burns’s first home start for Bath ended with a red card, for a tip tackle on worcester wing Josh adams. there was no intent to cause injury, but because adams landed on his head — after twisting in the air — Burns was sent off, distraught.
while todd Blackadder, Bath’s director of rugby, conceded it was the right decision, it was a harsh one. attempts to prevent head injuries are to be lauded, but there must still be room for discretion and common sense in the application of the laws. One size does not fit all.
these episodes have followed the Kyle sinckler disciplinary hearing, which showed how zero tolerance is not being applied across the board. It is a sporadic crackdown.
Harlequins’ Lions prop pleaded guilty to making contact with Michael Paterson’s eye and the offence was deemed to be intentional. Yet the disciplinary panel evidently sought to reduce the suspension from the recommended minimum of 12 weeks.
sinckler is a fine player and an engaging character, but has to keep working to quell his volatile streak. as would be expected, he was smart and polite and contrite at his hearing, but that should not be enough to reduce the sentence. It is not about sinckler himself, it is about how the process works.
there is no point having a framework for bans if they are routinely ignored. Harsh on the field then occasionally lenient in hearings — the system needs an overhaul.