Eugene Marais makes a pointed case that the URC has exposed itself through the Furlong citing outcome. The core argument is straightforward: Furlong was cleared despite video evidence of a groin-grabbing incident, while Jan-Hendrik Wessels was banned for 9 weeks last season for effectively the same offence — with less evidence, largely on the strength of Josh Murphy's reaction. Marais concedes that clearing Furlong was arguably the correct call in isolation — players shouldn't be suspended on disputed incidents and an opponent's histrionics. The problem is that this logic was never applied to Wessels, and the URC hasn't explained why. What results is a disciplinary framework that appears to apply standards selectively, and with the Boks heading to the Aviva in November with Furlong likely in the Irish front row, that inconsistency is going to sit badly with South African supporters for a long time.