Nigel Owens’ strong opinion on Tom Curry’s charge against Juan Cruz Mallía: What would he have sanctioned?

ByDavid Mitchell
Nigel Owens' strong opinion on Tom Curry's charge against Juan Cruz Mallía: What would he have sanctioned?

Last Sunday, The Pumas they lost 27-23 with England and one of the actions that remained at the center of the controversy was the Tom Curry’s untimely tackle on Juan Cruz Mallíaat 74 minutes. The best of rugby, on Disney+ Premium Plan.

The Argentine back was forced to leave the field due to injury and left his team with 14 men as Felipe Contepomi He had exhausted the changes, while the English forward did not even receive a yellow card and La Rosa defended in the final stretch with a numerical advantage.

In the section Whistle Watch who stars for the channel world rugby on YouTube, the historic Welsh referee Nigel Owensnow retired from the activity, analyzed what happened at Twickenham and gave his point of view on the play and the decision of the French judge Pierre Brousset.

“It’s one of those penalties that is an unfortunate penalty, in a sense. Curry is going to make the tackle, he’s not going to block the ball. If you’re going to block, but you don’t touch the ball and then you hit the player, it’s a penalty because you took the risk of trying to block, you didn’t succeed and you took him out of the game. Here Curry is already committed to the tackle. I think he still would have made contact with the kicker, but he certainly could have slowed down knowing he was going to kick.”Owens began.

And he continued: “So, first of all, this is a penalty. Curry’s action is at a limit, but it is a penalty and nothing more, to be honest. Now, what adds fuel to the fire and the discussion of why there is more is because of the Argentine player’s injury.”.

In that sense, Owens He stated that as a referee he could not have taken into account the injury of Mallia at the time to decide whether or not a card for Curry: “You don’t know the severity of an injury until the doctors check it and it can take a while. There may or may not be an injury, you don’t know, so you can’t consider it in your decision making as a referee”.

“But I also understand that it’s a point to discuss because, if that penalty causes an injury, why shouldn’t the penalty be greater? That’s what the (post-match) review process is for, to ensure a stronger penalty. But as a referee on the field, it’s best to deal with the facts: Curry, you were late, it’s a penalty and it could be yellow. No more than that because you can’t consider what happens to the player.”he concluded.

David Mitchell
David Mitchell

As a passionate sports journalist with over a decade of experience, I strive to uncover the heart and soul behind every game. Supported by a dedicated team of fellow enthusiasts and storytellers, I am committed to delivering insightful and engaging content that connects fans worldwide. Together, we celebrate the victories, challenges, and unifying spirit of sports through every article we craft.