PERHAPS THE BIGGEST talking point from Friday night’s Guinness Pro12 semi-final between Ulster and Glasgow was the penalty awarded against Ricky Lutton for a high challenge on Niko Matawalu.
It’s a shame that that’s the case after what was a hugely entertaining contest in Scotstoun, but George Clancy’s decision to penalise Lutton for his actions after the whistle had been sounded in the 72nd minute ultimately proved important.
Glasgow kicked into the Ulster half, won another penalty and then constructed a brilliant DTH Van der Merwe try that allowed the ballsy Finn Russell to kick a sublime winning conversion.
Advertisement
There have been a number of suggestions that Clancy should have given a penalty against Matawalu in this instance, but it would have been a call almost entirely without precedent.
Lutton’s actions were certainly worthy of a penalty, though it can definitely be argued that Matawalu’s exaggeration in this case should have been penalised as it goes against the spirit of the game and Law 10.4 (m).
The statement on Huget at the time said the France wing had committed an “act contrary to good sportsmanship in that he deliberately feigned an injury in contravention of Law 10.4(m).”
We’re not quite sure where on the scale Matawalu’s exaggeration of the penalty offence against him lies, but it will be interesting to see if anything more comes of this incident retrospectively.
It was a difficult situation for Clancy to referee at the time admittedly, particularly as Lutton’s actions were so blatantly penalty-worthy. Still, the unedifying overplaying by Matawalu is not something we want to see creeping into rugby.
A high-profile referee strictly punishing any other similar incidents in the near future would swiftly underline that Law 10.4 (m) is there to be taken seriously, as would a warning for Matawalu.
Lutton’s actions were silly and needless in the circumstances, but so too were Matawalu’s. The fact that we see so few of these incidents is a positive, but it also makes them difficult for referees to manage.
Ultimately, we want our referees to guard the spirit of the game as closely as the actual lawbook, so stern punishment of actions like Matawalu’s would be welcomed.
What was your take on the Matawalu incident? What call would you have made?
This was the most talked-about penalty decision of the Pro12 weekend
Updated at 07.15
PERHAPS THE BIGGEST talking point from Friday night’s Guinness Pro12 semi-final between Ulster and Glasgow was the penalty awarded against Ricky Lutton for a high challenge on Niko Matawalu.
It’s a shame that that’s the case after what was a hugely entertaining contest in Scotstoun, but George Clancy’s decision to penalise Lutton for his actions after the whistle had been sounded in the 72nd minute ultimately proved important.
Glasgow kicked into the Ulster half, won another penalty and then constructed a brilliant DTH Van der Merwe try that allowed the ballsy Finn Russell to kick a sublime winning conversion.
There have been a number of suggestions that Clancy should have given a penalty against Matawalu in this instance, but it would have been a call almost entirely without precedent.
Lutton’s actions were certainly worthy of a penalty, though it can definitely be argued that Matawalu’s exaggeration in this case should have been penalised as it goes against the spirit of the game and Law 10.4 (m).
It’s worth recalling that Yoann Huget was given a formal warning by EPCR for diving theatrically in a Champions Cup game between Toulouse and Bath in January.
The statement on Huget at the time said the France wing had committed an “act contrary to good sportsmanship in that he deliberately feigned an injury in contravention of Law 10.4(m).”
We’re not quite sure where on the scale Matawalu’s exaggeration of the penalty offence against him lies, but it will be interesting to see if anything more comes of this incident retrospectively.
It was a difficult situation for Clancy to referee at the time admittedly, particularly as Lutton’s actions were so blatantly penalty-worthy. Still, the unedifying overplaying by Matawalu is not something we want to see creeping into rugby.
A high-profile referee strictly punishing any other similar incidents in the near future would swiftly underline that Law 10.4 (m) is there to be taken seriously, as would a warning for Matawalu.
Lutton’s actions were silly and needless in the circumstances, but so too were Matawalu’s. The fact that we see so few of these incidents is a positive, but it also makes them difficult for referees to manage.
Ultimately, we want our referees to guard the spirit of the game as closely as the actual lawbook, so stern punishment of actions like Matawalu’s would be welcomed.
What was your take on the Matawalu incident? What call would you have made?
The Barbarians have a hugely strong squad to face Joe Schmidt’s Ireland
Romain Poite and more talking points from Connacht’s sickening defeat
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Controversy Dive George Clancy Niko Matawalu Glasgow Warriors Ulster