HIGH STAKES
Authorities must change flawed rules or players will suffer serious injury
“Brown’s rage was solely about player welfare”
MIKE BROWN has a reputation for bluntness and he wielded his words like a cudgel after helping Harlequins defeat Wasps at Twickenham last weekend.
He had been involved in an incident with Josh Bassett after 34 minutes which left him seething. As Brown rose high to claim a kick, the Wasps winger clattered into him and sent the Harlequins fullback plummeting face first into the ground.
It was a highly dangerous and reckless challenge by Bassett — who made no attempt to jump in a realistic effort to claim possession as he backed into the onrushing Brown with one arm in the air — yet, remarkably, referee Craig Maxwell-Keys and his team of officials deemed no sanction was required.
‘The referee may not have seen it but my family have,’ said the fuming Brown afterwards. ‘I’m sure he’ll see it when my family are in hospital because I’ve broken my neck. That sounds extreme, but I landed straight on my head. It was a very poor call.
‘I didn’t know much about it because I fell flat on my face with my legs in the air. I don’t know what the touch judge was doing because he was stood five metres from me.’
Brown’s rage was not centred in any way at his team being harddone by in a game they won 20-13, this was solely about player welfare and the need for officials to do their utmost to ensure player safety.
The same day, Leinster’s James Lowe was red-carded for a similarly reckless challenge on Andrew Conway during Munster’s win in Thomond Park. It was obvious there was no intent to injure from Lowe (in fact, it looked like the Kiwi lost his bearings the same way a concussed Ronan O’Gara did when giving away the penalty that cost the Lions the series against South Africa in 2009) but referee Frank Murphy, who had a fine game in extremely difficult circumstances, knew the issue of intent was irrelevant and red was the only option.
Yet, Munster had good reason to wonder why the same conclusion had not been reached the previous week when Ulster’s Robert Baloucoune took the legs out from under an airborne Darren Sweetnam as he was claiming the kick-off.
Referee Sean Gallagher only issued the young winger with a yellow — Baloucoune returned to score Ulster’s winning try — but the Ulster man was then cited and banned for two weeks in a clear admission that he should have seen red.
Gallagher consulted with his touchline official and could be heard claiming that, because Sweetnam has landed on his side and not in a more dangerous position, Baloucoune’s hit only warranted a yellow sanction. And this is where we hit a deeply concerning problem because, according to the existing laws (see panel), Gallagher was technically correct.
Law 10.4 (i) states that, in the circumstance of an unfair challenge, if a player lands on his ‘back or side’ then it is a yellow card but if he lands ‘in a dangerous position’ it is a red card.
It sends out a terrible message: ‘If you suffer serious injury then we will come down hard on the perpetrator but if you are just a bit winded, we’ll go easy on him.’
In an era when the game has never been more physical or dangerous and the focus on player safety never more pronounced, it is staggering to think the rulebook can be so warped and off beam.
Refereeing of this key area cannot be outcome based.
One thinks back to the red card Keith Earls received for his challenge on Glasgow’s Fraser Brown in 2016. As he left the pitch, Earls repeatedly jabbed his finger and vented his anger in the direction of the Scotland hooker, claiming afterwards that Brown ‘could have done more to protect himself’ and was deliberately trying to force a red card.
The Munster winger’s emotions were running high (it was the day after Anthony Foley’s funeral) and he later apologised but it did raise the crazy possibility of players deliberately trying to land dangerously to earn a red card for the opposition — because the laws as they exist allow for that loophole exploitation.
That loophole needs to shut quickly.
If a player challenges properly for a high ball (jumping off the ground with one or both arms in the air) and gets his timing wrong, then playing on, a penalty or a yellow card are acceptable.
However, if a player pulls down
or tackles his opponent in the air or collides with them after failing to challenge properly (no jump, no raised arms), it should be regarded as reckless, highly dangerous and a straight red — regardless of intent or how his opponent lands.
Given the real risk of serious injury, that is the only way to properly police high challenges.
Baloucoune and Bassett should have been sent off, just as Lowe was, and the more red cards we see in this area the better for the game because it will force players to exercise more care.
High challenges are an exciting and integral part of the game but they have to be properly controlled. At the moment, there is too much inconsistency and confusion for a situation that should be clear-cut and straightforward.
There is a dire need to amend the laws and introduce a strict, zero-tolerance policy — if you make a reckless challenge in the air, you are gone — because a continuation of the current, careerthreatening confusion could lead to grave consequences.
The last thing rugby needs is another flawed, outcome-based situation where it takes serious injury for authorities to wake up and take action.