"You’re f*****g biting’"- Details of Kyle Sinckler bite testimony on Lions tour

Kyle Sinckler may have counted himself fortunate to feature in the British and Irish Lions ’ third and final Test against South Africa after details of his biting testimony emerged.

The Bristol Bears star was summoned before an independent committee having remarkably been the only player to receive a citation following the Lions’ second Test loss to the Springboks.

England prop Sinckler evaded a potential three-month ban from rugby despite a judicial committee arriving at the conclusion that his teeth did make contact with Franco Mostert’s arm.

World Rugby has published findings from said hearing, where Sinckler’s defence cited evidence from forensic odontologist Dr. Douglas Sheasby, who said it couldn’t be determined whether the bite was intentional.

The defence suggested Sinckler felt Mostert’s “right forearm was around his face/mouth and [Mostert] was squeezing/grabbing his face/mouth tightly” at the ruck, adding the hold was “not pleasant” for Sinckler.

Mostert, 30, gave his account of a sharp pain lasting several seconds—although he admitted he did not see the bite—before pushing Sinckler’s head into the ground, shouting: "Oh, you’re f*****g biting!”

The Springboks lock was seen emerging from the ruck in the 64th minute looking down at his right forearm during South Africa’s 27-9 victory over the tourists at Cape Town Stadium.

He went on to say he saw a “red dot with teeth marks around it” upon inspection, although he concurred the mark was no longer visible after full time.

Importantly, referee Ben O’Keeffe also said he could not see any bite marks on Mostert’s forearm when the issue was highlighted.

Dr. Sheasby— a specialist in the analysis of injuries caused by teeth—surmised "the mark was caused by superficial contact with human teeth" but said it did not "demonstrate the features of an incisive bite mark.”

An excerpt from his testimony read: “It is important to note that the mark does not demonstrate any of the features of an incisive bite mark.

“The appearance of the mark is consistent with a recent injury.

Sinckler was open in admitting the mark on Mostert’s arm could have come from his teeth.

However, the defence contended it was due to “the unintended consequences of the interaction between [Mostert's] right forearm and [Sinckler's] teeth in the dynamics of the ruck.”

The only footage of the event came courtesy of television replays, but it was noted in the report that the amount of bodies in the ruck meant there was no video or photographic evidence.

Unable to establish clear intent, a panel of chairman Adam Casselden SC, David Croft and John Langford, concluded they “could not be satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that [Sinckler] deliberately inflicted a bite on [Mostert’s] right forearm.”

Sinckler was permitted to play in Saturday’s third Test as the Lions lost 19-6 to South Africa, coming on in the 58th minute as a replacement for fellow tighthead Tadhg Furlong.

Bristol will also be glad of the panel’s judgement considering a ban of three months or more would have robbed them of a key player for a large chunk of the upcoming season.

England’s Lions representatives are expected to have around 10 weeks holiday before reporting to their clubs for the 2021/22 campaign.

Source: Read Full Article