Do Not Sell My Personal Information
RugbyDump RugbyDump
Tuesday Oct 8, 2013

Martin Landajo banned for one week for stamping on Wallaby hands

Martin Landajo banned for one week for stamping on Wallaby hands
26
Comments

Puma’s scrumhalf Martin Landajo has been banned for a week for stamping during Argentina’s 54-17 Rugby Championship final round loss to the Wallabies in Rosario on Saturday. He was cautioned by referee Wayne Barnes at the time, but was later cited. 

Landajo appeared to be frustrated with the Australian players slowing the ball down, so took his frustrations out on the hands of both Saia Fainga’a and Adam Ashley-Cooper.

The latter confronted him angrily, clearly in a bit of pain after receiving some studs on the knuckles.

Referee Wayne Barnes had a good view of it, but upon referall to the TMO and seeing some TV replays, he was happy that a talking to and the penalty for the Wallabies should stand.

The citing commisioner however deemed it to be a red cad worthy offence, and it was referred to a discplinary hearing, where judicial officer Nigel Hampton said that it was a reckless attempt to free the ball at the back of the ruck.

“This was a lower end offence and, given the early guilty plea, Landajo’s contrition and his good playing record, appropriately could be dealt with by a one week suspension,” he explained.

Landajo has been suspended from all forms of the game, up to and including 14th October 2013.

The other incident of foul play in this match was when Rob Simmons hit Felipe Contepomi off the ball, knocking him to the turf. Simmons received a yellow card for it.

View highlights of Argentina vs Australia

26 Comments

  •  45678
    45678
    10:37 AM 10/10/2013

    As lot wrong with this. Aussies not back 10, fainga'a should be penalised as you have to make a concerted effort to disengage from the tackle before reentering, which you could argue he then doesn't enter via the gate. AAC is fine, but the Argentinian lock (albacete?) doesn't even attempt to enter through the gate (that was the reason for the pen I think) As for the stamp, the first is legitimate as he plays the ball, the second and third are just blatant, but it should have been an Argentinian penalty first

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg
    1:13 AM 10/10/2013

    I did not watch the game you're referring too, however one huge difference I could pick up on from just your description, is that it sounded like Mele was doing it in-play. Landajo did this after the whistle, and it was AFTER the whistle not during the whistle, and it was clearly 3 stamps. So the actions itself may not be so different but the timing was...

    Reply
  •  gallego
    gallego
    12:18 AM 10/10/2013

    If you want to counter ruck, you need to ACTUALLY be on your feet. Fainga'a committed two penalties before going for the ball (don't know what Barnes was thinking to be honest), therefore the stamping.

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg
    8:24 PM 09/10/2013

    Wouldn't have normally battered an eyelid at this, however because it occurred AFTER the whistle I think he should have been shown a yellow - end of story, no ban etc...

    Reply
  •  cheyanqui
    cheyanqui
    6:27 PM 09/10/2013

    Anyone watch the Leicester / Northampton match over the weekend? As soon as David Mele subbed on for Ben Youngs, he was dishing out stamps with more vigor than an immigration official at a Soviet-era border post. And yet, no citing there? Not even a TMO review or flag out from the ARs.

    Reply
  •  matt
    matt
    3:37 PM 09/10/2013

    If there is one thing we can say for sure, it is that the citing process is anything but draconian, some of the bans handed out in the last few years have been laughably short. It is amazingly inconsistent though.

    Reply
  •  finedisregard
    finedisregard
    3:02 PM 09/10/2013

    The Argentine #9 was definitely in the wrong. A yellow (because the whistle had already been blown) or a 2nd penalty with the ref marching out another ten meters would have been fine. My complaint is with players missing matches. This has become out of control and draconian, and the process is certainly inconsistent. In my opinion there are only a few things that players can do to warrant a ban (eye gouging, third guy in a fight, aggressive behavior towards a ref). High tackles, incidental handbags, "stamping" never should cause a player to miss a second game. Not letting a player play is a big deal and should be a measure they only look at in extreme examples.

    Reply
  •  matt
    matt
    1:59 PM 09/10/2013

    Just watched it again and the thing that annoys me most is that not a single aussie was near to being back 10m

    Reply
  •  matt
    matt
    1:47 PM 09/10/2013

    Very true, but that doesnt excuse it

    Reply
  •  colombes
    colombes
    12:49 PM 09/10/2013

    Yellow card would have far more sufficient I'm really worried for rugby spirit and fluid rhythm with all these stoppage-times Refs and assistants stop to think and analyse (often the best) to give all powers to video

    Reply
  •  connachtman
    connachtman
    12:41 PM 09/10/2013

    Yellow card for foul play would have sufficed

    Reply
  •  nja8
    nja8
    11:22 AM 09/10/2013

    It does deserve a ban. A scrum half is allowed to use his boot if the hands are on the ball illegally. I have cheated a few times and received this treatment most times, I have never had an issue with it. By the time he starts to stamp the hand he targets is nowhere near the ball. So punishment seems perfectly fair. He is taking the risk of breaking someone's hand needlessly.

    Reply
  •  razor
    razor
    8:14 AM 09/10/2013

    Looks like the aussies and the argies will be battling it out for the wooden spoon at the bottom of the table for the next ten years.

    Reply
  • 8:00 AM 09/10/2013

    well Matt, there's heat of the moment thinking and then there's watching it from the couch reasoning.

    Reply
  •  badge
    badge
    5:13 AM 09/10/2013

    Not sure I agree with a ban; regardless, one week isn't exactly the end of his rugby career. However, Simmons should definitely have his ridiculous hit on Contepomi reviewed. That was a red in my opinion.

    Reply
  • 4:11 AM 09/10/2013

    Agreed, Simmons body check could have seriously injured old contepomi. One week easy

    Reply
  •  totesmcgoates
    totesmcgoates
    11:59 PM 08/10/2013

    Just a penalty for me. I think the ref got this one right. I can see where Landajo was coming from but it was a bit over exuberant for my liking. Pretty much a nothing incident though.

    Reply
  •  gallego
    gallego
    11:47 PM 08/10/2013

    Nothing wrong with that "stamp", Fainga'a was committing a blatant penalty and Landajo chose to act. Ridiculous stuff, banning him but not Simmons?

    Reply
  •  matt
    matt
    10:00 PM 08/10/2013

    Unfortunately he looks at barnes who has his arm up and pointed towards australia and then gets revenge, so even that slightly feeble defence doesnt apply

    Reply
  •  reality
    reality
    9:49 PM 08/10/2013

    Personally, if the referee blew the whistle and awarded my team a penalty and the opposing scrumhalf then repeatedly stamped all over my hands I'd be pretty annoyed and would want justice.

    Reply
  •  medicaluke
    medicaluke
    9:46 PM 08/10/2013

    I agree with you. However, I think that ball carrier not releasing came before any further infringements. I consider this a good bit of refereeing in that Barnes seems to realise that the reason the players lose support is that the player didn't release the ball quick enough. I suppose it's easy to see when the ball carrier runs in on his own into two opposition.

    Reply
  • 9:35 PM 08/10/2013

    I think it was more frustration at not being able to get into any sort of rhythm, more to do with solid Aussie play than anything else in my opinion.

    Reply
  •  stroudos
    stroudos
    9:19 PM 08/10/2013

    See, I thought they'd changed the law a season or two ago, so that you had to support your own bodyweight at the ruck. If you're resting on your hands, that means you're in an illegal position. In this case, the Argentine player knocked "the advertising agency" into that position so not his (AAC's) fault, but if they are applying this rule then Faingaa would be deemed fair play for a bit of shoe-to-hand service. Have only seen highlights of the game, but I would surmise the Aussies must have been slowing Argie ball down quite a lot for him to go stamping quite this vigorously?

    Reply
  • 9:18 PM 08/10/2013

    Maybe he thought the whistle went for killing the ball and felt that he was in the right (as he would have been in most games that I've played in). A week is good as a message for the kids...although I preferred the message we got when we started off, be courageous and every action has an opposite and equal reaction!

    Reply
  •  matt
    matt
    8:22 PM 08/10/2013

    I thought at the time that Barnes got this wrong. IMO the 'stamping' was fine because it's something that seems to happen at every ruck without issue. But my problem was with the way that he heard the whistle, looked up, and then did it 3 times. I think it should be more of a ban

    Reply
  •  finedisregard
    finedisregard
    8:18 PM 08/10/2013

    Cheap sure, but a week? Come on. They're handing out bans for everything and anything. I hate sanitized rugby!

    Reply


Great Tries

View All

Big Hits & Dirty Play

View All

See It To Believe It

View All

Funnies

View All

Amateur

View All

Player Features

View All
Martin Landajo banned for one week for stamping on Wallaby hands | RugbyDump - Rugby News & Videos