Munster player’s complaint about Tadhg Furlong is extremely serious and should lead to a hefty ban if proven

The quality of the Leinster-Munster match on Saturday has been overshadowed by Gavin Coombes’s extremely serious complaint. His allegation that his groin was interfered with led to Leinster’s Tadhg Furlong being cited by Ulsterman Peter Ferguson. If proven and the consequent judicial verdict is guilty, then a hefty sentence is the only outcome possible.

Some people hold the opinion that Coombes should have kept schtum, adopting a rugby-style code of omerta. That is just nonsense. He was absolutely right to call it.

Previous foul play that was comparable has resulted in a 10-week ban for England’s Joe Marler when he committed the offence on Alun Wyn Jones. And last year, the Bulls and South African player Jan-Hendrik Wessels received a ban of nine weeks for grabbing the genital area of Connacht’s Josh Murphy. So, a potential sanction will, one imagines, at least be similar to these. It will hardly be enough.

World Rugby chairman Brett Robinson, meanwhile, told us last February there were no new law trials on the horizon. However, recent statements from current New Zealand coach Dave Rennie, former New Zealand coach Steve Hansen and Japan coach Eddie Jones indicate storm clouds are gathering.

World Rugby will meet in November to, once again, discuss the game’s shape. In February, it had been widely anticipated that the chairman would push for immediate law trials in line with his pre-conference position, so that they could be implemented for next year’s World Cup.

Instead, Robinson told us the feedback he was getting “from around the world is that the game is broadly in a positive position”. His statement was unexpected and it poured oil on troubled waters. There is clear disagreement between the hemispheres, particularly in Australia and New Zealand, around key areas of the game. The outcomes of November’s meeting will be revealing.

Rennie has publicly criticised South Africa’s scrum tactics. Hansen, as well as making some good points, has told us that the meetings are a waste of time. He has described World Rugby as a ”secret society" that doesn’t “tell us anything”. Jones, earlier this year, stated that the conference was “a joke, a waste of time”, adding that “World Rugby is an old man’s society to enforce the charter”.

Petulant, cranky stuff. The comments indicate that the chasm of disagreement is wide and now appears to be inclusive of ill-feeling. World Rugby is a democracy and, when law-change proposals are not accepted, it really shouldn’t be a reason to attack the organisation.

The February meeting also underlined the need for greater alignment in officiating. A great idea, but it has not happened – far from it. Super Rugby Pacific, the main members being Australia and New Zealand, are busily ploughing their own furrow, particularly on the question of the red card, and whether it should be 20 minutes or permanent. Hansen is keen to see it sorted out. I couldn’t agree more, but it will need a significant change of heart somewhere along the line to achieve the required consistency.

It’s inarguable that all egregious fouls – including eye-gouging, testicle-twisting and headbutting – qualify for the permanent red card. Hollie Davidson’s recent permanent dismissal of Toulouse’s Rodrigue Neti for a dreadful shoulder hit to an opponent’s head was clearly the correct call. It would be a hell of a long shot to term it accidental. That level of danger needs to be added to the egregious list, and yet it represents a significant point of difference. Down south, it will receive a 20-minute red. If it is not added to the list, then World Rugby have to consider what sort of sport they are promoting.

The TMO issue will also be raised at the forthcoming conference and, yes, it would be very nice to reduce their involvement. But this is a hoary old chestnut – you’re cursed if you do and cursed if you don’t. If New Zealand were to lose a World Cup quarter-final to South Africa because the TMO’s role was reduced, it would be interesting to hear the thoughts of Hansen and Rennie.

Where World Rugby can be held to account is in their monitoring of law trials. The lineout trial has evolved into an illegal mauling shambles and they have had plenty of time to correct it. No law change is necessary, just an insistence that the current law is refereed. Nothing could be simpler. Failure to address a huge unintended consequence is baffling.

There are, of course, too many attacking mauls, assisted by the turning of blind eyes to their illegalities. A law change would also help. It is one hell of a penalty that allows a team to kick for the corner and then be awarded the throw-in. It is, in fact, a double penalty. Amending it to a more logical defensive throw would automatically reduce the number of these mauls.

There has also been a suggestion that a new law to allow collapsing the maul would be very effective. Well, it has been tried before, in the Experimental Law Variations of 2009. The result was that attacking mauls largely disappeared, to be replaced by defensive mauls, which were followed by yet more clearing kicks. It just didn’t work.

Mauls and scrums favour massively bulky teams, and that’s just something we have to accept. South Africa have immense power in these areas and while many don’t like it, the Springboks are quite entitled to play to their strengths.

The options for the coming conference are to table proposals and vote on them, otherwise the chairman may have to reach for his pitcher of oil once more. These troubled waters run exceedingly deep.