Owen Farrell can now play in the World Cup after his red card against Wales was shocked. Photo: CameraSport via Getty Images/Andrew Kearns
The skills of Richard Smith's KC, the silk that just saved Owen Farrell from a curse at the World Cup, are exactly as advertised. Guildhall Chambers, his Bristol law firm, testifies to his ability to «deliver extraordinary results in seemingly hopeless situations». Revoking Farrell's red card in what appeared to be an open and closed case, with multiple camera angles showing the England captain's shoulder and Wales' Thane Basham's head, could be considered the lawyer's most brilliant stunt.
Owen Farrell's yellow card 🟨
Bunker check system is back in the game.#ENGvWAL
Edit: changed to red 🟥 pic.twitter.com /c26hwm9Skf
— Darren (@SaffasRugby) August 12, 2023
Until the startling verdict of the independent judiciary, it seemed that the main debate was whether Farrell would be suspended for three matches, four or even six. Instead, Smith's subtle persuasion skills ensured that he would not be suspended for anything. Not to mention that he will miss England's first World Cup match against Argentina next month, he is eligible for selection in Dublin on Saturday. So startling is the reprieve, the joke that goes around and around is that Donald Trump, running for a second term despite facing four separate charges, now wants Smith on the speed dial list.
It will be remembered as a fine moment in the art of law to find a softening point for an action that, even in slow motion, seems inexcusable. But for rugby, it could still be a dark day. The sport is in a brain injury crisis so deep that Steve Thompson, a 45-year-old ex-prostitute from England who struggles to remember his children's names due to dementia praecox, wishes he never played.
< p>Rugby union insists it is listening, reaffirming just this week a commitment to lower tackle height with the intention of eliminating up to 4,000 head injuries a year. Yet he had just secured the support of a lawyer who successfully argued that Farrell should be acquitted for hitting Basham in the head with such force that the Welsh rower failed concussion protocol. What, pray tell, is the purpose here? Is this really protecting the interests of the players? Or just make sure good old Owen gets to Marseille on time?
Further journey: Rugby head injuries
Claiming mitigation for such an incident is a complex matter. The most logical option is to ask for a pardon on the grounds that it is a one-off, the perpetrator made an uncharacteristic error in judgment. There's scant hope for that with Farrell, whose catalog of high tackles is extensive enough to be turned into a horrendous viral montage covering everything from his 2018 clumsy punch on South Africa's Andre Esterhuizen to his attack on Charlie Atkinson, a teenage Wasp knocked out with wildly swinging forearm two years later.
Thus, the only way out was to promote the «change of dynamics» defense. In essence, the committee found that Jamie George's involvement in the contact zone resulted in Basham falling directly into the path of Farrell's attacking shoulder. Except that the side shots are unlikely to depict England's leader as an unwitting participant. First, Farrell bends both knees in preparation for the grab. Then, as soon as he touches Basham's head, without any obvious attempt to wrap the Welshman, his legs straighten out as if someone is moving upwards.
At first glance, this is such a classic example of a dangerously high tackle that an RFU doctor could present it at a seminar. And it was provoked by a player who, to put it mildly, is in shape.
Are such tackles acceptable if you are the captain of the England team?
His punch to Basham was not the first time that Farrell's punching technique had been punished quite severely. It wasn't even the first time this year. In January, he was suspended four games for hitting the chin of Gloucester rear rower Jack Clement with his shoulder, reduced to three, on the condition that, like a racer forced to take a speed boost course, he attended «equipment school.»
And this is the figure that the game considers it necessary to spare? This is a terrible message to send, and it can have haunting consequences. In high-profile hearings, as the rugby world waited to see how tough the committee would be, Farrell walked away unpunished, even as a repeat offender who had just landed another straight blow to the head. Do we infer from this ruling that such takeovers are permissible, provided you are the England captain and have access to the best legal representation?
It is not surprising that apoplexy occurred in the Welsh camp. Basham, the victim of it all, is unlikely to start Saturday's match against South Africa after failing to assess his head injury, limiting his World Cup options. Farrell, the criminal, only missed 17 minutes of rugby. It is at this point that you wonder if the sport is not only guilty of an incomprehensible decision, but also of an unforgivable dereliction of duty.
Even George Ford, a striker who benefited from Farrell's absence from the World Cup, blabbed about what happened, eloquently corrected himself midway through the radio interview, calling his teammate a «runaway». with the help of gear. The distrust is complete, and players past and present are united in their astonishment that rugby legislators are still protecting the defenseless in the most difficult issue of the century.
Farrell will be able to play for free on Saturday despite last weekend's tackle
A full ruling is urgently needed, if only to explain how the committee circumvented World Rugby's ruling that mitigation does not matter in cases of «always illegal» foul play. If the answers are inadequate, both Six Nations and World Rugby must appeal. For the sake of rugby, Farrell's absolution can't go on. The least a man like Thompson, who has revealed how his battle with dementia once led to him being sentenced to commit suicide, should do is that the sport should act convincingly and consistently when it comes to the brains of players.
Farrell's escape suggests that he does anything but this. A disturbing precedent has been set, which you may well expect when the class action lawsuits kick in. It's far from melodramatic to suggest that kids who idolize Farrell will also be greatly confused by what they've seen, and that they'll have one question when their decision is subjected to the next critique. «Owen did it, so why can't I?»
Rugby needs to seriously consider whether it is ready for this future. Otherwise, frankly, he will reap what he has sown.
The decision to cancel the England captain's red card and release him for the World Cup has sparked a heated debate among Telegraph readers. Read what they said here.
Свежие комментарии