Adam Thomson gets 1 week ban

[FlukeArtist]

Question:
Was the one week ban sufficient?

Personally, I think that this was appropriate punishment for this act.

It was the lightest to touches to the head, and Strokosch himself said he hardly felt the contact.
Lets not forget that Thomson was carded during the game for thsi incident too.

I have heard people (incl that most vocal of d1ckhead journalists; Stephen Jones) getting carried away calling it a "blatant stomp" or "trampling"
This is complete nonsense.
Look up the definition of those words.
What Thomson did fits neither definition.

Just my opinion; but I think the punishment fit the crime here

 

[Teh Mite]

 

[Tony Manx]

Question:
Was the one week ban sufficient?

Personally, I think that this was appropriate punishment for this act.

It was the lightest to touches to the head, and Strokosch himself said he hardly felt the contact.
Lets not forget that Thomson was carded during the game for thsi incident too.

I have heard people (incl that most vocal of d1ckhead journalists; Stephen Jones) getting carried away calling it a "blatant stomp" or "trampling"
This is complete nonsense.
Look up the definition of those words.
What Thomson did fits neither definition.

Just my opinion; but I think the punishment fit the crime here

I agree with you................nothing in it but the law is the law..

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

I think two weeks would've been reasonable.

 

[William18]

One week was fair. Greyling only got two weeks after all. I think Greyling should have got about 8 weeks and Thomson about two. However, if a delibarate and malicious elbow to the head is worth two weeks then one week is certainly fair for Thomson.

 

[Draggs]

I recognize using the boot on an unruly forward to get the ball out as acceptable, but never stepping on the head.
Just like gouging, a slight contact in the eye area is enough, so a little tap with the boot is enough.

I do think it was more that Thomson was being an idiot and reckless, but still could be very dangerous.

 

[smartcooky]

Thomson got a one week suspension... absolutely hilarious. Its slap on the hand to dulcify the the masses; one that actually has no effect at all. Steven Hansen will be laughing his arse off.

Thomson will just miss the match against Italy, a match that he was never going to play in anyway! Hansen made it perfectly clear before the first match that all the players on the squad were going to start at least one the first two matches. He also made it clear that McCaw would miss one meaning another player would Captain.

The starting loosies for Italy will be (and always were going to be)...

8. Kieran Read (Captain)
7. Sam Cane
6. Liam Messam

Reserve: Victor Vito (because he covers all three spots)

In NZ and Australia, this is what is known as a "Claytons" suspension; the suspension you are given when you're not given a suspension.


But it might not stand.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/7952664/Thomson-ban-under-scrutiny-as-review-announced

No mention of this on the iRB website

 

[UlsterRugby2012]

It was completely intentional and actions like that can be very dangerous, he knew exactly what he was doing. A 1 week ban is a joke - comparing it to another ban for a different offense is pointless. I would have thought a minimum of 2-3 weeks.

 

[Draggs]

So could the ban be extended?

Also read in that article that Ben Smith has been cleared to play in the last two matches. I have mixed feelings about this.

 

[Larksea]

it was nothing even the guy he stomped said it was nothing and the yellow card was enough.

Stupid yes, dangerous or malicious no.

it was prob 2 weeks reduced to 1 because of his record. or something similar.

 

[smartcooky]

Also read in that article that Ben Smith has been cleared to play in the last two matches. I have mixed feelings about this.

Why?

 

[cyRil]

Wonder if Gavin Quinnell would agree...

 

[William18]

Then Simmons gets 8 weeks, when Warburton only got three last year. Does anyone know if on field punishment is related to off field punishment. I.e. Warubrton got a red card so the IRB went light on him while Simmons wasn't cited so he got the opposite?

 

[William18]

It was completely intentional and actions like that can be very dangerous, he knew exactly what he was doing. A 1 week ban is a joke - comparing it to another ban for a different offense is pointless. I would have thought a minimum of 2-3 weeks.

Perhaps. My main point with the reference to Greyling was the pathetic attempts by much of the Northern Hemisphere media to say that the lack of punishment for Thomson represents bias towards the All Blacks. Why would they be biased towards us? There are only two New Zealanders on the Board. I really don't care if someone thinks Thomson is a thug and should never be allowed to play rugby again. What I don't like are bullshit conspiracy theorists when decisions within the last 12 months have gone both for and against us.

 

[nickdnz]

Ugh. I wish there was some consistency with these punishments. Greyling getting two weeks was a joke considering how deliberate and dangerous it was, but Thomson should have known better. I'd have been happy with three weeks. I don't think it was malicious, but it still should not have happened. Like Smartcookie says, this punishment will have no effect on Thomson or the team.

Perhaps. My main point with the reference to Greyling was the pathetic attempts by much of the Northern Hemisphere media to say that the lack of punishment for Thomson represents bias towards the All Blacks. Why would they be biased towards us? There are only two New Zealanders on the Board. I really don't care if someone thinks Thomson is a thug and should never be allowed to play rugby again. What I don't like are bullshit conspiracy theorists when decisions within the last 12 months have gone both for and against us.

This is the part that annoys me. There are some right c**ts out there who use this sort of stuff as an excuse. I remember not so long ago Keven Mealamu got a small ban for a headbutt while at Twikenham and the NH press went nuts, ignoring the fact Dylan Hartley did a WWE elbow drop on Richie McCaw's head and got no punishment. For that reason I'd rather we get a ban on the more serious side. Already there are people going nuts; idiots such as Stephen Jones and Eliota Fuimaono-Sapolu who cry of extreme inconsistency and some amazing love of the AB's from the IRB. If the IRB does review it and increase the ban, I certainly feel there will be a hell of a lot more inconsistency from the IRB, and it'd smack of the IRB giving into external pressure and social-networking.

 

[Draggs]

Why?

Because he is a very good back and the AIGs play us in just under two weeks.

 

[Helmy]

What I really want to know is how do the IRB come with so many consistently inconsistent decisions?

 

[Helmy]

Because he is a very good back and the AIGs play us in just under two weeks.

I imagine Conrad Smith will be the first choice centre for that game.

 

[FlukeArtist]

@ smartcooky - have you posted that exact post on the Herald (or Stuff) today?


@ Draggs - you make a fair point about the eyes.

 

[smartcooky]

Because he is a very good back and the AIGs play us in just under two weeks.

OOOOH, be careful! You could end up being nickdnz's best mate forever with that sort of talk!!

@ smartcooky - have you posted that exact post on the Herald (or Stuff) today?

Nope... I don't normally post comments to the Toilet Paper that is the Herald.

Can you post a link to it?