Leaked Simon Easterby email gives Ireland controversial advantage at Six Nations

An email sent at the beginning of last week seems to have been pivotal in Ireland ensuring Garry Ringrose can participate in the remainder of the . The Irish centre was slapped with a three-game ban for his high tackle on Ben Thomas during Ireland’s victory over Wales in Cardiff last month.

However, one of those matches was discounted due to his attendance at tackle school and Leinster’s United Rugby Championship face-off with Cardiff at the weekend was included in the ban. This means Ringrose will only miss one of Ireland’s remaining two Six Nations games.

Although he won’t be playing against France this weekend, he will be available for the final round against Italy. His availability for that final match has sparked controversy, as Romain Ntamack was also banned for three matches – for a high tackle on Thomas – earlier in the tournament.

But while the French fly-half also had his ban reduced to two matches through tackle school, Toulouse’s Top 14 clash with Clermont wasn’t factored in, resulting in him missing two Six Nations games. Amid allegations of double standards, France’s governing body has even reached out to World Rugby for clarification.

However, it seems the answer lies in the judicial hearings of both decisions, with an email sent by Ireland two days after the Wales game proving crucial.

During Ringrose’s hearing, Simon Easterby, the interim head coach for Ireland, explained that due to having three world-class centres in Ringrose, Bundee Aki and Robbie Henshaw, they wanted him to play against Cardiff to gain more experience after limited game time in the Six Nations. The decision was made to release him to Leinster to allow him to get more game time before the Ireland v France match, according to the findings from the hearing.

Easterby also mentioned that part of the reason for releasing the player to Leinster was to give him the opportunity to play in a different position so that Ireland could consider using him on the wing as well as in the centre. The panel was shown an email sent on Monday, February 24 from the IRFU to Leinster, explaining that he would be released back to his region.

The finding from the hearing read: “As such, the decision had been made to release the player to Leinster to allow him to get game time before the Ireland v France match, in which he would have been expected to feature but for this red cards. In addition, Simon Easterby explained that part of the reason for releasing the player to Leinster was to allow him the chance to play in a different position in order that Ireland can consider using the player on the wing as well as in the centre.

“Given all of the above, the panel was satisfied that the player had been expected to play at least some part in the match for Leinster against Cardiff and, as such, it is a “meaningful” match under the rules and should count towards the player’s sanction on this occasion.”

In contrast, the findings from Ntamack’s hearing ruled that “there is no direct evidence confirming that the player was fit, available and expected to play in that match” against Clermont”.

The evidence, it cited, came from France head coach Fabien Galthie, who was deemed to have the “ultimate responsibility” for deciding which players would be made available to their clubs during the Six Nations. Galthie was quoted as saying: “My position with respect to Mr Ntamack is that I had not yet decided which players were to be designated for the first fallow week and would have reserved my final judgment until after the England game on 8 February 2025.

“Mr Ntamack is an exceptional fly-half with 38 caps for France. It is very likely that I would have selected him to play against England on 8 February 2025. Typically, I will designate the best available players in the squad having regard to how many matches they have played so far and the importance of the upcoming matches and any tactical considerations for those next matches.

“There can occasionally be a balance to be struck between designating a player and protecting them from fatigue and potential injury, versus not designating a player and allowing them to play for their club so that they can continue to develop physical fitness and mental sharpness…. flyhalves, in particular, need regular game time to maintain (or regain) their talents for reading the pitch and managing the flow of the game”.

He also reflected on Ntamack’s recent history: “In 2023 Six Nations Tournament, Mr Ntamack started all five fixtures and was designated (which meant he would not be released back to his club) for both fallow weeks. Ultimately, I accept that Mr Ntamack at his best is a very important and influential player for France, he was designated in the Six Nations 2023, and he might seem an obvious choice for designation in this tournament.

“However, Mr Ntamack has also missed a significant amount of rugby through injury over the past two seasons and it is difficult for me to assess his current level of performance at international level based on just the Wales game.

“My decision to designate Mr Ntamack for the first fallow week, or to make him available to Toulouse, would have been influenced by Mr Ntamack’s performance versus England on 8 February 2025, as it is the case for all players. It is therefore difficult to be categoric after the first game in the tournament as to which players are ultimately to be designated, such decision being made, in so far as the first fallow week is concerned, after the second game.”

Galthie’s testimony came following the England match in the tournament’s second round, and it led to the disciplinary panel determining that they were not convinced the player would have been “fit, available and expected to play in the Clermont fixture”. The panel remarked on the possibility of his availability, stating that he “may have been available. But he also may not have.”

This article originally appeared on