Sonny Bill Williams back for Bledisloe Cup opener after appeal successful

Sonny Bill Williams' appeal against his suspension has been upheld by the independent disciplinary panel of World Rugby on Thursday (Friday NZ Time), which could see him feature in the All Blacks' Bledisloe Cup opener against Australia.

 

The All Blacks second-five was shown a red card for a dangerous shoulder charge on British and Irish Lions wing Anthony Watson in the second test in Wellington last month and was suspended for four matches.

 

New Zealand Rugby had proposed Williams could serve the ban by missing the third Lions test, the final match of the Blues' Super Rugby season and two other games before the Wallabies test.

 

 

They proposed counting a pre-season match for his National Provincial Championship side Counties Manukau and a "three-way" warm-up match played by the All Blacks against two NPC sides as the two games.

 

An independent committee came to conclusion in favour of Williams after an appeal, saying the match against Counties Manukau and Taranaki on August 11, which was initially left out of the suspension, complied with World Rugby's "definition of a match".

 

Therefore, Williams will now be suspended from all forms of rugby up to and including 11 August.

 

The All Blacks face the Wallabies in their Rugby Championship and Bledisloe Cup opener in Sydney on August 19, with the return match against Australia in Dunedin the following week.

 

Williams faced the three-man panel via video conference on Tuesday night following World Rugby's decision last week to include the Rugby Championship test against the Wallabies as part of his four-game ban.

 

The committee was chaired by Justice Graeme Mew of Canada along with Shao-Ing Wang (Singapore) and Stefan Terblanche (South Africa).

 

The former Kiwis international was the first All Black in 50 years to be sent off.

 

Half of Williams' punishment was served by missing the drawn third test with the Lions and the Blues' shock defeat against the Sunwolves.

 

However, two of three fixtures that were submitted by NZ Rugby to fulfil the ban - an inter-squad trial game for Counties-Manukau and the All Blacks' game of a half each against Taranaki and Counties - were ruled ineligible by World Rugby.

 

NZ Rugby wasted little time appealing the verdict last Friday.

 

It was understood they were highly upset by the decision not to recognise the All Blacks' specially arranged televised game against Taranaki and Counties, which will be fully officiated and have paying spectators, as constituting a "meaningful" match.

 

 - Reuters

 Good news of the mighty ABs but the the definition of what constitutes a meaningful match may have been stretched a little. Kiwis are above board as usual though

Looks like they just snuck in an arbitrary game to get him into the Bled opener.
"Specially arranged" game? Yes! Exactly!

JW I can't see any technical difference between the SBW tackle and the Sam Kane tackle that earned him a yellow vs the Stormers. In both cases it was a dual tackle, with the higher tacklers Kane and SBW turning in their shoulders at the last second. The only difference could have been intent and consequences....and that's hard to argue. The SBW tackle was clearly foul play, but as in the case of so many tackle in the air situations, the sanction was not consistent with other similar situations I have seen. And it saved the series for the Lions...so not a small thing.

 I agree the sanction for such cases is not consistent, if red cards were always given out then SBW's case would have been more understandable.  All we ask for is consistency but that's doesn't seem easy to achieve by the looks of things.

 
No surprise here.

Kiwis have received preferential treatment as long as I can remember.

It's not going to change any day soon either.

 this is not serious,.... World Rugby and SANZAAR are a joke,....

SBW was never going to play a warm-up game with Counties,... never,.... this is just a loophole to avoid the sanction
same for the AB warm-up,.... if a player gets a red card in an official game only official games should count,.... not warm-up games

 We want the best people on the filed for entertainment's sake. How else are we going to promote rugby as a global sport? I prefer to watch SBW play because it is more entertaining to watch him play.
Being pig headed and obstinate about  a very dubious rule 'what constitutes a match" is just stupid. I mean take the case of Hooper for instance....u get my drift"

I'm with you Hakwa...far too much bureaucratic interference in the game. SBW has been punished in perpetuity in any case.

 Basque, and sometimes you are a bit less of a d!ck. Glad I can agree with you every once in a while.

The games which count as the sanctioned list should be agreed at the hearing. Otherwise, any under10 C team game could count for Sunny Bill. 
It is disrespectful to IRU to appeal the sanction. 

 so how this thing about sanctions should work? only players who don't provide entertainment could be sanctioned? who's going to say who provides entertainment and who doesn't?
or are you proposing to eliminate the sanctions in the name of entertainment?

SBW was banned for 4 games (very far from perpetuity) and should serve the suspension,... some time ago the sanctions were in weeks, World Rugby changed it to games because applying the sanctions in weeks created great disparities according to when the punishable action and the correspondent sanction was made,... if it was made at the end of a competition (SR or RC in the SH) or the EOYT, the player sanctioned could not miss any game (he served the suspension in the weeks without games) but if the player was sanctioned in the mid of any comp he had to serve the whole ban
letting this happen they are reproducing the disparities they were trying to resolve

Actually simpleton he is carrying the burden of the AB's not winning the series and being the first AB red carded for ages. That's the burden he will be carrying in perpetuity and have to explain to his grandkids. Do you see now?

 A burden well deserved. I like SBW, but he made a stupid error and he will live with it...it's called life.

 "he is carrying the burden of the AB's not winning the series and being the first AB red carded for ages.That's the burden he will be carrying in perpetuity and have to explain to his grandkids."

really? what does all this BS have to do with serving or not serving the ban imposed by World Rugby?
and, please, don't get so melodramatic

The reason you never understood my sentence Basque is you have no imagination.....you also have no sense of humour. Which makes you a heavy burden. Do try to lighten up and stop lecturing people.

 "The reason you never understood my sentence Basque is you have no imagination.....you also have no sense of humour. Which makes you a heavy burden,... stop lecturing people"

says the one who is lecturing others,...
I perfectly understood your sentence,... and has nothing to do with what we were discussing in this thread

 “Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”...Yoda

 ...You'd have to say Crotty would more likely be starting at 12 for the ABs in the next game based on merit anyway...SBW may not even make the team to face Arstralia- he can be a liability at times , did'nt do much at the Blues this year either - overhyped by the media,... almost as overhyped and overrated as the Barrets not to mention one of NZ's most injury prone players...we can manage fine without him...

 Crotty had a fantastic game in the final & was MOM. Will be interesting to see who selected for the starting backs for the ABs. Both Crotty and SBW are getting a little long in the tooth so some new talent needs to be developed & this will include J. Barrett. A mix of older and younger talent is always good.

 So whats so fecking hard about saying beforehand for all players from here on in what constitutes a game for the purposes of a ban ?And having people whose team will be involved in the game said player under suspension is gunning for is stupid.