Citing officer had right to take no action - IRB

The International Rugby Board today confirmed that independent citing officer Willem Venter had every right not to take action against All Blacks pair Keven Mealamu and Tana Umaga for the spear tackle that left Brian O'Driscoll with a dislocated shoulder.

Sir Clive Woodward was furious at Venter's decision to dismiss his official complaint regarding the ugly incident which forced O'Driscoll to be stretchered off less than 90 seconds into the first Test.

But Venter had to apply what is known as the 'red card test' - would the player have been sent off had the incident been seen by the officials? - and the South African clearly decided not.

Chris Rea, the IRB's head of communications, said: "If a complaint is brought forward then the citing officer is duty bound to look at it. But if he feels there is no case to answer he will not cite it.

"The judiciary is there to deal with any complaint that is upheld. If he feels there is a case for a citing, then a citing would be brought.

"If the citing officer feels there is not a case then it is within his power to make that response. Not every controversial incident spotted should be cited."

Woodward questioned how there could possibly be no case to answer and claimed there was "plenty enough evidence" for the matter to be at least be referred to the IRB's judicial committee.

The Lions head coach gave a 20-minute presentation, showing television grabs of the tackle, to explain why he believed it was worthy of serious action. Woodward believes it was worthy of a red card.

He said: "To me, there was plenty enough evidence. I am very disappointed the two players weren't even brought in to talk about it.

"You can still be cited and go to the hearing and be totally acquitted, but just to say nothing happened in that incident is, to me, an amazing decision to make.

"We have a procedure in place that is normally okay. You have a citing officer who goes through the tape, takes reports from both camps, both coaches and if there is anything to report, that goes to a judiciary hearing.

"He should cite any incident he thinks should be looked at and when you see it, it is quite a horrendous situation. It has to be cited."

But Bruce Reece-Russel, the Rugby Football Union's disciplinary secretary, could also understand why Venter took the option he did given the guidelines in place.

"It is a very difficult decision for any citing officer to make because he has to get over the threshold of the red card test," he said.

"The threshold is: would the player have been sent off had the match official seen the offence?

"Making that determination he has got to seek every bit of evidence available. He only had 12 hours to make his decision and the video evidence in his view is inconclusive."

Spear tackles are dealt with harshly in the game of rugby league, but in union there very few - if any - precedents of players being sent off for the offence.

Rea said the IRB take dangerous tackles "very seriously" and it is understood officials are concerned it is becoming a growing problem, with players developing the habit of tackling without using their arms.

The IRB will not be launching any form of investigation into the O'Driscoll incident and Rea said he had personally not seen it.

"These are Clive Woodward's views. I have no doubt if he wishes he will include it in a report," said Rea.

"The IRB are looking at it, assessing it as we do with everything. At this stage it's too early to comment on."