Red missed: The evidence that helped Jordie Barrett escape a ban
Plus: There is panic in Oz but the NZR v ARU fight is all about money not rugby
You have probably heard by now that Jordie Barrett had his red card from Sunday expunged and will not face any further sanction (no doubt fuelling a wave of anger from the one-rule-for-All Blacks-another for-everyone-else brigade).
In his finding, the Judicial Committee Chair Robert Stelzner SC ruled the following:
“Having conducted a detailed review of all the available evidence, including all camera angles and additional evidence, including from the player, a medical report on the opposition player involved, and from two expert witnesses, and having considered the submissions from his legal representative, Stephen Cottrell, the Judicial Committee found that the Player had not transgressed Rule 9.11 and had therefore not committed an act of foul play.”
What is less known is how the judiciary came to that conclusion. This why.
AUT researchers provided independent biomechanical analysis of the incident and determined that he had used “a standard technique” for a high ball catch by raising his knee to gain jump height.
They determined that Barrett did not “kick” his leg out as his knee angle remained close to 90 degrees from the time of takeoff from the ground to the impact on Wallaby Marika’s body during landing.
It was also determined that Barrett’s “hip flexion was necessary to stop the backwards rotation of his body due to his trunk position”. If he had not flexed at the hip he could have landed on his head.
Finally it was deemed that due “to the laws of motion, Barrett’s landing position was predetermined at take-off, and he could not have changed it deliberately”.
***
Just when you think things can’t get any more silly between New Zealand and Australian Rugby, they get, well, more silly.
Like a bad breakup, the parents have now started communicating to each other via the kids.
The All Blacks thrashed the Wallabies 38-21 in Perth on Sunday, putting an exclamation point on a Bledisloe whitewash. In fairness, there were a number of mitigating factors for the Wallabies’ haplessness that we will address soon, but the unvarnished facts are these: three matches to nil; 128 points to 68; 18 tries to 10.
Depending on your viewpoint, then, it is either a really awkward time or, if you’re Australian Rugby, the perfect time to launch into your biggest whinge about the state of the transtasman relationship.
To summarise, tensions in the House of Sanzaar were laid bare in The Spinoff here and, with personal bias to the forefront, it was an article that pulled no punches while remaining balanced with well-placed sources on all sides of the argument contributing.
Since publication of that, there have been a number of what you could loosely call follow-ups, all getting more reductive by the day.
Last week, there were a few gems in a Sydney Morning Herald story headlined, “‘They think they’re superior to us’: How the RA NZR relationship fell apart”.
It wasn’t so much a retrospective, however, as it was a way to explore the premise that NZR could shift its support to the USA rather than Australia to host the 2027 World Cup (a not altogether ridiculous concept).
“I’m not sure [former NZR chair] Brent [Impey] would have supported us, but [new chair] Stewart Mitchell is a good guy, an old school Kiwi, and I’d be disappointed if they didn’t support us under his regime. He’s a guy who has shown his word is his bond,” said RA counterpart Hamish McLennan.
For heaven’s sake Hamish, just pick up the phone and call him. Being an “old school Kiwi”, you’ll still be able to get him on a landline.
The story re-hashed the shemozzle around the All Blacks pulling out of the original date for the Perth match and no matter how justified you felt NZR were in waiting, there’s no doubt Australia got the raw end of the deal. You could not be sitting in their shoes and not be p***ed off about how Bledisloe ’21 has played out. Perth was meant to be game two but they acquiesced and played two matches in a row at a ground that turns them into mice thus, if you believe in curses, guaranteeing by the time they got home the Bledisloe would be out of reach.
“We did the honourable thing, but in hindsight that was a mistake,” continued McLennan in the SMH. “They definitely think they’re superior to us and perhaps on the field, that’s currently a fair cop. But the basis of the ANZAC bloc is equal partnership and what goes around, comes around.”
This was not the only piece emanating from the SMH - respected rugby columnist Wayne Smith argued that Australia’s record at home against the All Blacks alone should afford them more respect - about the state of the relationship, but with the highlight reel quotes, it was the most emotive.
It’s also misleading. The relationship has not broken down because the All Blacks beat the Wallabies and as a result NZR thinks they’re the shizzle, even if that is true.
It has broken down because they have a sport they need to sell, rugby, and a product they want to take to market - the reimagined Super Rugby.
By its actions last year, NZR made it clear they want to own and control that product (with private equity funding it) and be the chief financial beneficiaries of it.
The Perth no-fly-zone was a compelling sideshow and the Wallabies on-field woes an awkward storyline, but the spine of this story is not about hurt feelings and national rugby pride.
It is, ultimately, a story about $$$$.
***
The Wallabies Tate McDermott has the potential to be an all-timer in a position that has been well served by the likes of Ken Catchpole, Nick Farr-Jones, George Gregan and Will Genia. Until he gets a No 10 outside him who can drive the machine around the park, however, he’s going to continue to play in a lot more Bledisloe Cup losses.
Dave Rennie must be wondering what the hell to do with his side. They have some world-class moments - scoring 10 tries and having a couple more disallowed across three tests is nothing to sneeze about - but seem to adhere to rugby’s version of Newton’s Third Law: for every positive action there is an equal and opposite negative reaction.