SIDE ENTRY
Leighton Koopman|Published
It will be interesting to see where the allegations against Leinster prop Tadhg Furlong lead after Munster’s Gavin Coombes accused him of grabbing his testicles during their United Rugby Championship (URC) derby this past weekend.
Coombes was cleared out at a ruck by Furlong, and video footage appears to show him being grabbed between the legs by the Irish international after which he made the complaint.
Not long ago, South African Jan-Hendrik Wessels was suspended for eight weeks for allegedly grabbing the testicles of Connacht’s Josh Murphy, and this incident is a stark reminder of that case.
However, in Wessels’ case, there was no clear video evidence to suggest that he had done it, yet he copped a ban. This time around, there appears to be clear evidence of the incident, yet no action was taken by the match officials.
Munster have come out in support of their player, with head coach Clayton McMillan saying Coombes would not lie about something like this. Leinster coach Leo Cullen, meanwhile, denied seeing any evidence of a “ball-grabbing” incident.
“It’s one of those things that we leave in the hands of the powers that be,” McMillan said after the game.
“All I know is that I back our players 100%, and if they make an allegation like that, they would not make it lightly. That is not the sort of person Gavin is, so we will see where that goes.”
Referee Andrew Brace stopped play and consulted his Television Match Official (TMO), Colin Stanley, but Stanley could not find any evidence. The incident happened close to half-time, but no further action was taken.
Furlong has been cited under Law 9.27 – a player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship including but not limited to grabbing, twisting or squeezing the genitals by the match citing commissioner. Now the verdict is out whether he will face the same consequences that Wessels did.
It is a serious accusation and one that should be treated in the same manner as the Wessels case. If the same standards applied to the Bulls’ front-rower are followed, then Furlong should receive a lengthy ban as well. The precedent set by the Wessels suspension calls for it. And the only way Furlong, who could then miss all of Ireland’s Nations Championship clashes, can escape these allegations is if it is found that the incident was unintentional and Coombes accepts it as so.
But, of course, we all know that certain laws appear to be applied more strictly to South African players than to other internationals. Wessels missed a couple of Springbok games because of his ban, despite there being no concrete video evidence to support the claims. So, judging by the footage available and the claims of Coombes, some time on the sidelines should be the fate of the veteran prop.
Should Furlong receive the same kind of suspension, Ireland and particularly their scrum could be in a spot of bother ahead of the November internationals, when they still have to face the Springboks in the Nations Championship.
The ball is now in the citing commissioner’s court, and rugby’s disciplinary chiefs have an opportunity to show that the same standards apply to everyone, regardless of the jersey they wear.
Wessels’ eight-week ban has set a precedent, and the allegations involving Coombes and Furlong must be examined with the same level of seriousness. If the evidence warrants disciplinary action, it should follow — just as it did in the case of the Springbok.
Anything less will only fuel the perception that South African players are held to a different standard when it comes to foul play. The URC cannot afford to leave that question hanging, especially when the credibility of its disciplinary process is on the line.