Argentina boss Felipe Contepomi was clearly frustrated as his side fell agonisingly short of an epic come-from-behind victory over England last Sunday.<\/b><\/p>\n
The Pumas erroneously finish the match with 14 men, former referee Nigel Owens<\/a> has confirmed, after the head coach had emptied his bench before Tom Curry<\/a> flew out of the England defensive line and hammered into Juan Cruz Mallia after the full-back had executed a marvellous 50:22.<\/p>\n Referee Pierre Brousset deemed that the flanker\u2019s actions simply warranted a penalty and no more, but the tackle meant that Mallia had to hobble off the pitch.<\/p>\n With England<\/a> leading 27-16 at the time of the incident, it left Los Pumas<\/a> chasing two late tries, and at least one conversion, with the time ticking away on the clock in order to win.<\/p>\n Contepomi fumed on the sidelines, arguing with officials and was seemingly annoyed that Curry remained on the pitch and Argentina played the final few minutes down a man.<\/p>\n Curry\u2019s tackle<\/p>\n To their credit, Los Pumas made a good fist of an insane come-from-behind victory with Joaquin Oviedo spilling the ball over the line in the act of scoring. England were reduced a man because of an indiscretion by Alex Coles, and from the ensuing penalty, Argentina got the score to put them within striking distance as Rodrigo Isgro dived over.<\/p>\n They were cruelly denied in the final play of the game as they failed to secure a lineout deep inside England\u2019s 22, and Ben Earl pounced, and the ball was booted into touch to secure the narrow win.<\/p>\n Contepomi was irate after the match, not only because Curry\u2019s tackle didn\u2019t result in a card but because it also injured his star full-back. He also claimed that the England flanker lashed out at him in the tunnel after the game.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen he came there, I said, \u2018Man, you broke our player\u2019s knee\u2019, he said, \u2018Oh f\u2013k off\u2019 and pushed me like that,\u201d he claimed.<\/p>\n England legend claims Tom Curry \u2018knows what he\u2019s doing\u2019 as Felipe Contepomi backlash rumbles on<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Verdict on the late tackle<\/p>\n Appearing on World Rugby\u2019s Whistle Watch<\/a>, Owens explained that Curry\u2019s actions warranted a penalty but did not believe it was much more than that.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s one of those penalties which it is a penalty, but it\u2019s an unlucky penalty in one sense,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n \u201cSo Curry is going out to make the tackle. He\u2019s not going for charge down. But if you go for a charge down, for example, and you don\u2019t get that ball, you don\u2019t touch that ball, and then you wipe the player out, it\u2019s a penalty because you took the risk to get the charge down. You didn\u2019t get it. You\u2019ve taken him out of the game. So you will end up being penalised.<\/p>\n \u201cSo here Curry is sort of committed to that tackle. I think he still probably would have made contact with the kicker, but I certainly think that he could have certainly eased off a bit, knowing he\u2019s kicking the ball. I probably am going to knock into him, but the ball will be gone.<\/p>\n \u201cSo, first of all, that is a penalty. Curry\u2019s actions they\u2019re on the border, but there is a penalty, and it\u2019s nothing more to be honest. Now, what\u2019s added fuel to the fire is a discussion of why it isn\u2019t more because of the injury to the Argentinian player.\u201d<\/p>\n Owens further explains that the referee cannot further penalise Curry just because Mallia got injured from the incident.<\/p>\n \u201cYou don\u2019t know the severity of that injury until the medics take him off and check him, or whatever is going to happen. It could take a while. There could be an injury, there could not be an injury. So, you don\u2019t know that,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n \u201cSo you can\u2019t bring that into your decision-making as a referee. But I also have empathy.\u201d<\/p>\n Wider angle of Tom Curry\u2019s late tackle.<\/p>\n Felipe Contepomi described it as \u2018reckless\u2019.<\/p>\n Certainly has time to change his route as he wasn\u2019t going reach Mallia in time but most flankers would make that hit. #ENGvARG<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/4B1YquFpxh<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Jared Wright (@jaredwright17) November 23, 2025<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Under World Rugby law 9, the principle reads: \u201cA player who commits foul play must either be cautioned or shown a yellow card or be sent off.\u201d<\/p>\n Law 9.13 adds: \u201cA player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders, even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. Sanction: Penalty.<\/p>\n Ultimately, the officials deemed that Curry\u2019s actions didn\u2019t reach the yellow card threshold, despite the unfortunate injury to Mallia.<\/p>\n Nigel Owens\u2019 \u2018no ifs or buts\u2019 verdict on James Ryan\u2019s sending off for a \u2018reckless\u2019 shot on Malcolm Marx<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Replacement mistake<\/p>\n However, Owens did detail an error that the officials made as Argentina played the remainder of the match a man down, which shouldn\u2019t have been the case.<\/p>\n He discussed the details of the protocol with former Lions and Wales centre Jamie Roberts, who said: \u201cSo Juan Cruz Mallia obviously takes that hit, injures his knee, I believe, and he gets taken off. Now, Argentina have to play the remaining minutes with 14 men because they used all their subs.<\/p>\n \u201cNow, there\u2019s an argument, for example, if that was a head injury and Juan Cruz Mallia came off with an HIA, you\u2019d then be able to replace that player. Am I right? Also, if he\u2019s come off injured when there\u2019s an act of foul play, they should be allowed to replace that player.\u201d<\/p>\n Roberts is spot on. Tactically replaced players, like starting half-backs Simon Benitez Cruz and Tomas Albornoz, could have returned to the action because of the nature of Mallia\u2019s injury. World Rugby laws allow for tactically replaced players to return to the pitch as a blood or head injury replacement, but also for injuries caused by foul play.<\/p>\n Law 3.33 reads: \u201cTactically replaced players may return to play only when replacing:<\/p>\n a. An injured front-row player. Law 3.33.d is the crucial one in this case, as Curry\u2019s tackle was an act of foul play that caused Mallia\u2019s injury, meaning that Contepomi could have put one of the replaced backs, Cruz and Albornoz, back on, provided that they weren\u2019t taken off substituted because of injury.<\/p>\n Owens\u2019 explanation<\/p>\n Owens explained this policy: \u201cSo when you\u2019ve used all your bench, there are certain circumstances which allow you to bring a player that has been subbed back on.<\/p>\n \u201cIf you\u2019ve replaced a player and replacing a player means you\u2019ve taken him off because he\u2019s injured, he\u2019s gone. Nothing he can do. Substitution players that can come back on are front rows obviously to keep the contest, blood injury, remember bloodgate 2009, head contact.<\/p>\n \u201cAnd the other one is if a player has been forced off the field for an injury because of an act of foul play, then you\u2019re allowed, my understanding is, you\u2019re allowed to bring a substitute player back on.<\/p>\n \u201cSo in this instance here, my understanding is Argentina should have been allowed to bring a player back on to go back up to 15 players because the reason that player was off the field was because of an act of foul play.<\/p>\n \u201cSo they should have been back up to 15. So the number four or five [official] on the sideline or the referees and officials should have been aware of that law, and they should have been at 15 men.\u201d<\/p>\n Ultimately, the officials and Argentine management did not pick up on the caveat in the law, which would have allowed for one of the starting Los Pumas players to return to the action, provided they weren\u2019t replaced due to injury.<\/p>\n READ MORE: <\/b>England allowed to pick Springboks-tied centre as World Rugby give greenlight under \u2018exceptional circumstances\u2019<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n
b. A player with a blood injury.
c. A player with a head injury.
d. A player who has just been injured as a result of foul play (as verified by the match officials).
e. The nominated player described in Law 3.19 or 3.20.\u201d<\/p>\n