Wed 30 Nov 2016 | 07:58
Kieran Brookes and Calum Green both suspended following breakdown altercations

12
Comments

Kieran Brookes of Northampton Saints and Calum Green of Newcastle Falcons have both appeared before an RFU Disciplinary panel for offences stemming from their Aviva Premiership match over the weekend.

Brookes was charged with charging into a ruck, contrary to Law 10.4(h), while Green was charged with striking with the arm, contrary to Law 10.4(a). Both appeared before a three-person RFU Disciplinary panel chaired by Mike Hamlin in Leeds on Tuesday evening.

Prop Brookes was sent off by referee Andrew Jackson for charging into a ruck and making contact with the head of Scott Lawson. What made it look worse, and probably draw the attention of the officials, was that Lawson fell back onto his halfback, injurying his leg in the process.

Interestingly Green, for his part, was cited for striking Brookes with his forearm.

Both Brookes and Green pleaded guilty and were handed two-week suspensions.

Since Green has a good disciplinary record, his suspension was reduced to one week. He will be available for selection December 6th.

Since Brookes does have a disciplinary history, the panel chose against reducing his two-week ban and therefore, he will be available December 13th.

Quick look at it below, with video to follow if possible

12 Comments

  • dancarter
    1:45 PM 03/12/2016

    Wow, I messed that up. I sent the wrong comment and sent it early. I was trying to send a reply about Andrew Hore to someone on the Naya Tapper post. Anyway.

    What I meant to say was: I hope Leinster let Northampton Saints have a seemingly comfortable half time lead (say, 22-6?) and then score 27 unopposed points to come back and win it in the second half.

  • dancarter
    1:39 PM 03/12/2016

    Andrew

  • hedderball
    10:15 PM 01/12/2016

    Clearly a great disciplinary environment at Northampton - first that twat Calum Clarke and now this. Looking forward to them getting a tonking in Dublin in a couple of weeks time.

  • dancarter
    3:18 PM 01/12/2016

    I see a shoulder charge aimed at Lawson's head and a fairly clear red card...

  • finedisregard
    11:51 PM 30/11/2016

    You're not alone Fats. Brookes loses his feet. That's the only problem I see.

  • drg
    5:37 PM 30/11/2016

    Does go off his feet though....

  • im1
    2:05 PM 30/11/2016

    the angle shown is not the incriminating one. when you see it from the other side its bad

  • fatwheeler
    1:44 PM 30/11/2016

    Am I alone in thinking there isn't that much wrong with what Brookes does? Maybe should have had a better bind on Scott Lawson while he is totally smashing him, maybe should have been a little bit lower (though it seemed like he really hit Lawson on the shoulder more than the head, and, anyway rucking isn't like tackling - everyone is low to the ground, so it's pretty hard to avoid any contact near the other player's head), but basically it's not a hugely unusual clean-out - pretty similar to basically every clean-out of a player jackalling for the ball.

  • oliver
    12:58 PM 30/11/2016

    A Samoan player did the exact same thing to enact revenge on a teammate...

    https://twitter.com/philousports/status/797504255343128577?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

    not even a yellow!
    World Rugby is turning me into a broken record I fear

  • danknapp
    12:24 PM 30/11/2016

    We're being trolled by World Rugby.

  • drg
    11:33 AM 30/11/2016

    It's clear to see that Lawson wasn't his intended target, this was well disguised revenge on his own player (second row perhaps?) who is lying on the floor and gets a knee drop. Clearly the bloke has made a comment about Brooke's height, or perhaps put his packet of smarties on a high shelf and Brooke's just lost the plot and saw an opportunity to get his revenge...

  • moo
    9:33 AM 30/11/2016

    Come on then World Rugby. Please explain Elliott Daly getting 3 weeks vs these two? I don't disagree with the Daly suspension in the current climate. But that the Brookes incident especially is surely more dangerous (neck compression, etc.) and with his previous, it is 'worth' 2 weeks? What do they do, roll some dice to decide?