bunnies would have won the game anyway. plus contact to the head mate that was a penalty anyway.
You are missing the point.
1. IF ,as you say "contact to the head is a penalty" everytime it happens on the field, then we will have a game of penalties or a game where tackles will all be below the waist, JUST IN CASE anyone brushes another players face!
In the context of gameplay, EVERY contact to the head is NOT automatically a penalty. Step back and consider that before you go further.
2. There was NO penalty awarded by the referee; only intervention from the video ref 'because there was a convenient pause in play' in saying that HE thought there should be a report of the incident meant that the on field ref HAD TO penalise what he had already deemed to be NOT WORTHY of a penalty in order to then be able to put it on report.
Now cast your mind back to numerous forward passes & 'no-tries' etc that have occurred this year and NOT been penalised by the on-field Ref. None were changed by the video Ref in those instances; was it merely because there was no 'convenient pause in play'???
The interference from the video Ref (and it WAS interference as he was NOT called on by the on field Ref to make any judgement calls) DID influence the outcome of this game.
Neither team actually matter to me, but the elasticity of rules does bother me and many others. I don't want my team affected by some jumped up Video Ref; it's time to seek some answers on this one.