Was the TMO's reluctance to upgrade to red just because the camera angles weren't great? From what I saw, the way he lunged forward looked nasty, and he probably couldn't have hit anything but head, but there just wasn't a clear angle of the impact.
I'd say that's what it was practically, but still it means the TMO stuffs this up. You can't mitigate down for always illegal acts of foul play, which clearly a headbut after the whistle would fall into.
I can see how with the proceeding kerfuffle and the referee not seeing it all clearly live why he might not call a straight red. Agree with @Strewthcobber's assessment of the stuff up. It would have been interesting how it might have changed the dynamic of the game, France down a player for another 10mins.
The RFU own Twickenham Stadium. Surely any other option would be more costly? But I get their point/issue. Seems rather wasteful to have these large assets so under-utilised.
I think it's more a play aimed at the constituency of the local council. That is every bit rugby country and if there is any concrete suggestion they'd lose out on England test matches in their backyard they'd revolt. Or at least that's what it looks like the RFU's play is, I think there's a solid chance it's the blazer crowd that they're trying to leverage that doesn't want the non-rugby events, so it may not work as well as they hope.
I think you're right. They're looking enviously at Tottenham's multi-use of their stadium and Haringey Council's support for the stadium from the get-go, not always to the delight of the locals. They've also floated the notion of buying 50% of Wembley, a shit stadium if ever there were one. It's politics, something the RFU have famously always managed to get wrong.