@stargazer said in Wallabies v France 3:
@gibbonrib said in Wallabies v France 3:
@steven-harris where did you find that?
Sadly that statement doesn't clarify the decision at all. I'd like to watch that video to see if that helps (fully expecting that it won't though).
@stargazer said in Wallabies v France 3:
@gibbonrib It's only the media release. Not the decision.
Oh, shit, I forgot that if a red card is dismissed, there won't be a written decision. Just the media release.
So the media release is all we get. It has been published on the WR website now, btw.
Forget getting a further clarification of the decision.
For those nerdy enough to care, WR have released a written decision:
https://resources.world.rugby/worldrugby/document/2021/07/21/231213a5-9cec-4fe5-9fbd-82ec2b9f40f9/HRM000.1.996-Decision-M-Koroibete.pdf
It's a bit wordy, but I've read it so that you don't have to. Key points it makes are:
There was no contact to the head
Initial contact was to the shoulder
There was contact to the neck
This means it is technically foul play
The degree of danger was not high, so it should not have been a red
Things it doesn't clarify are:
Whether the degree of danger was low (starting sanction: penalty) or medium (yellow card)
Whether there was significant mitigation (it mentions both players dipping into the tackle, but doesn't rule on whether that was relevant to the decision)
Whether the correct decision would have been a yellow, or just a penalty
Things it doesn't say, but strongly implies:
Jelonch is a cheating git