Andrew hore hit on Davies = Assault?

[Larksea]

Wow, a couple of really one-eyed Kiwis on here (a couple, not all!) - what Hore did was despicable - it wasn't anything to do with clearing out at a ruck, it was a swinging arm at the head of a 6'6" second row who had his back turned. Whether Hore has done something like this in the past or not is irrelevant - everyone has a "first time" and it doesn't excuse the act.

It's a shame that, even though he will get a ban, it won't hurt his team like a red card on the day would. It's time the rule in the English Prem is rolled out across the board: ref's can go to the TMO for foul play incidents that they've missed at the time. It would have been a straight red that would likely have changed the game significantly (although I still think that NZ would have won - Wales were dreadful)

Thing is we are used to seeing McCaw be subjected to stuff like this on at times a weekly basis and often nothing happens. McCaw got a forearm to the head recently and the offending player got like 1 week and ended up playing the all blacks in the very next game between the sides a couple weeks later.

If Hore gets more than a couple of weeks then the main difference will be from the player he hit being injured. If that's the case does that mean McCaw needs to stop shrugging off all the foul play he is subjected to stop being so hard and actually get injured so there is a chance the offenders actually may get a meaningful punishment?

I agree if spotted a Red Card would have been a good call and that even though Hore had a very good game a red card would not have changed the result. And yes it was bad, no real excuse for it. I was just trying to figure out what was going through Hore's mind at the time. No it wasn't clearing a ruck but the welsh player was on the wrong side of the ruck and in the way of Hore getting to the breakdown. I think a bit of a push or shoulder out of the way to let him know he's in the wrong spot would have would have been ok but what Hore did was way over the top, and mostly out of Character for him. Up Till now anyway...

 

[dullonien]

Thing is we are used to seeing McCaw be subjected to stuff like this on at times a weekly basis and often nothing happens. McCaw got a forearm to the head recently and the offending player got like 1 week and ended up playing the all blacks in the very next game between the sides a couple weeks later.

If Hore gets more than a couple of weeks then the main difference will be from the player he hit being injured. If that's the case does that mean McCaw needs to stop shrugging off all the foul play he is subjected to stop being so hard and actually get injured so there is a chance the offenders actually may get a meaningful punishment?

I agree if spotted a Red Card would have been a good call and that even though Hore had a very good game a red card would not have changed the result. And yes it was bad, no real excuse for it. I was just trying to figure out what was going through Hore's mind at the time. No it wasn't clearing a ruck but the welsh player was on the wrong side of the ruck and in the way of Hore getting to the breakdown. I think a bit of a push or shoulder out of the way to let him know he's in the wrong spot would have would have been ok but what Hore did was way over the top, and mostly out of Character for him. Up Till now anyway...

Slightly silly comments there Larksea. A lot of things in life are dependent on the outcome of a situation. There's been many cases of people getting killed from single punches because the victim has fallen and hit his head, does that mean that shouldn't get taken into account and get treated like any other punch that has resulted in nothing more than a bloody nose? You've got to live with the consequences of your own actions, and the consequences of Hore's deliberate actions yesterday were that a player ended up in hospital. Intent is also important, but consequences also need to be taken into account.

I don't see why any illegal activity towards McCaw needs to be brought up. This has nothing to do with him. if the IRB got punishments wrong in the past, doesn't mean they should act the same again. It's about time the penalties for foul play were treated fairly and consistently, and by ignoring previous decisions is the only way to do that.

I honestly don't think Bradley Davies can be criticised for not being 'hard'. I wouldn't mess with the bloke! He got caught unaware and knocked out, it happens, nothing to do with how hard a person is.

Regarding the last paragraph, please see my previous post. Being down to 14 men often changes a match hugely. I think it's good from a Welsh perspective that we didn't get an artificial good performance and score by playing against 14 men. We learned more about ourselves by playing against 15.

 

[ZeFrenchy]

Slightly silly comments there Larksea. A lot of things in life are dependent on the outcome of a situation. There's been many cases of people getting killed from single punches because the victim has fallen and hit his head, does that mean that shouldn't get taken into account and get treated like any other punch that has resulted in nothing more than a bloody nose? You've got to live with the consequences of your own actions, and the consequences of Hore's deliberate actions yesterday were that a player ended up in hospital. Intent is also important, but consequences also need to be taken into account.

Personnally, I think that a punch that ends in a bloody nose should be treated as something that could have ended in a deadly fall. Greyling, Hore, and the Samoan who hit Mermoz yesterday, all should get (should have gotten) bans of ~5 games, IMO.

 

[Standardprocedure]

McCaw gets treatment because teams get fed up with him constantly being the wrong side of the law and not getting pinged - it's what has made him the world's best 7 and most influential player. I don't condone the treatment he gets (2 wrongs and all that...), but he makes a target of himself and will therefore attract undesired attention when ref's seem oblivious or unwilling to hold him to account.

That said, it means f--- all to the current circumstance - Davies was retreating (hence why his back was turned) to get behind a ruck that was forming (he wasn't on the wrong side, whatever you say Larksea, believe what you will) and was cheap shotted from behind. Simples

 

[Helmy]

I also don't agree with this Hore doesn't have a past lark. What Hore doesn't have is a record, which means he hasn't been caught before. He's usually genius at giving opposition players a bit of a rough up without getting caught, the only difference now is that the attack was so blatant he got seen. I really don't know how this is being defended, if Hore wanted him out of the way of the ruck, he could have pushed him to the side. Instead, he reached up to swing around and cop him around the facial area, which then caused Davies to fall in Hore's path, making it that much harder for him to get to where he was trying to.

If we're going to bring McCaw into this, what do you think the reaction would have been from the New Zealand press if the shoe had been on the other foot?

 

[Standardprocedure]

If we're going to bring McCaw into this, what do you think the reaction would have been from the New Zealand press if the shoe had been on the other foot?

this

 

[William18]

Slightly silly comments there Larksea. A lot of things in life are dependent on the outcome of a situation. There's been many cases of people getting killed from single punches because the victim has fallen and hit his head, does that mean that shouldn't get taken into account and get treated like any other punch that has resulted in nothing more than a bloody nose? You've got to live with the consequences of your own actions, and the consequences of Hore's deliberate actions yesterday were that a player ended up in hospital. Intent is also important, but consequences also need to be taken into account.

I don't see why any illegal activity towards McCaw needs to be brought up. This has nothing to do with him. if the IRB got punishments wrong in the past, doesn't mean they should act the same again. It's about time the penalties for foul play were treated fairly and consistently, and by ignoring previous decisions is the only way to do that.

I honestly don't think Bradley Davies can be criticised for not being 'hard'. I wouldn't mess with the bloke! He got caught unaware and knocked out, it happens, nothing to do with how hard a person is.

Regarding the last paragraph, please see my previous post. Being down to 14 men often changes a match hugely. I think it's good from a Welsh perspective that we didn't get an artificial good performance and score by playing against 14 men. We learned more about ourselves by playing against 15.

The point is with the Thomson incident much of your media said "there is an international conspiracy in world rugby for the All Blacks. If Thomson played for any other country he would have got five or six weeks."

This week we hear "Hore is just a typical All Blacks thug. The All Blacks are always doing this kind of stuff and getting away with it."

I don't know how those comments aren't going to make us angry. Most All Blacks fans agree that Hore is a thug and that he deserved a red card and several weeks on the sideline. What we don't like are comments from your media insinuating that the IRB is biased towards us (why on earth would they be?) We also don't like being called thugs when we have only ever seen two red cards in the history of international rugby. Admittedly, we should have had one more yesterday and two more in 2005. However, we are clearly no more thuggish than any other country. Greyling is relevant because it shows that decisions go both for and against us. It is also relevant because it shows that the NH media are hypocritical. They do not care about foul play by a South African on a New Zealander but go crazy when it is a New Zealander on one of their own. In New Zealand we believe that this type of journalistic behaviour is designed to cover up the NH appalling record against the All Blacks and their inherent jealousy that a team from the other side of the world is so much better than them.

 

[Larksea]

I agree Hore is no saint, clearly dirty stuff goes on in games that doesn't get picked up on the cameras or if it does doesn't get shown on air. Evidence in this game that maybe the welsh got some sort of revenge because not long after Hores left eye looked like ****, maybe something happened maybe not. Can't be sure because often when you think something dirty has happened and video footage shows the player just copped something accidental.

But with ~80 test caps and not much evidence of serious foul play against him whatever he has done can't be too bad, either that or he is brilliant at it for not getting spotted by the cameras. For sure Hore is always good for a Bit of rough stuff and a lot of talk this is not in the same league, it's a whole other level.

I don't pretend to understand front rowers, they are a unique breed. Funny during the game the AB's went into a huddle. Messam joined and put a hand on Woodcocks shoulder and his other hand on another player. Woodcock shrugged Messsams hand off. and a few min later he had his hand on Hore's shoulder. There is obviously little groups within the squad and unique personalities that don't always go together, going way back to the good old days.

 

[William18]

this

We would have been bloody ****** off!

What our media wouldn't have done is called all Welsh players thugs or said that there was an international conspiracy for Wales amongst the IRB. If a Welsh player had been let off lightly we might have said that the IRB does not treat player welfare seriously enough. However, we would not have made up bullshit conspiracy theories.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

I agree Hore is no saint, clearly dirty stuff goes on in games that doesn't get picked up on the cameras or if it does doesn't get shown on air. Evidence in this game that maybe the welsh got some sort of revenge because not long after Hores left eye looked like ****, maybe something happened maybe not. Can't be sure because often when you think something dirty has happened and video footage shows the player just copped something accidental.

STOP!

Please don't continue with this nonsense.

 

[donmcdazzle]

this

Well Greyling got a week for a very similar incident on McCaw, so if the shoe was on the other foot I would expect Hore to get a week. What did Powell get for trying to decapitate MCaw last time we were in Wales? That was very similar too. So somehwere between the 1 week Greyling got and whatever Powell got is what I would expect Hore to get if he did this against MCaw.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Well Greyling got a week for a very similar incident on McCaw, so if the shoe was on the other foot I would expect Hore to get a week. What did Powell get for trying to decapitate MCaw last time we were in Wales? That was very similar too. So somehwere between the 1 week Greyling got and whatever Powell got is what I would expect Hore to get if he did this against MCaw.

*** for tat now ...

 

[Larksea]

The point is with the Thomson incident much of your media said "there is an international conspiracy in world rugby for the All Blacks. If Thomson played for any other country he would have got five or six weeks."

This week we hear "Hore is just a typical All Blacks thug. The All Blacks are always doing this kind of stuff and getting away with it."

I don't know how those comments aren't going to make us angry. Most All Blacks fans agree that Hore is a thug and that he deserved a red card and several weeks on the sideline. What we don't like are comments from your media insinuating that the IRB is biased towards us (why on earth would they be?) We also don't like being called thugs when we have only ever seen two red cards in the history of international rugby. Admittedly, we should have had one more yesterday and two more in 2005. However, we are clearly no more thuggish than any other country. Greyling is relevant because it shows that decisions go both for and against us. It is also relevant because it shows that the NH media are hypocritical. They do not care about foul play by a South African on a New Zealander but go crazy when it is a New Zealander on one of their own. In New Zealand we believe that this type of journalistic behaviour is designed to cover up the NH appalling record against the All Blacks and their inherent jealousy that a team from the other side of the world is so much better than them.

100% spot on

 

[donmcdazzle]

*** for tat now ...

Well that is a fair expectation isn't it and I answered the question. Why does Hore deserve to get more than similar incidents?

 

[Larksea]

STOP!

Please don't continue with this nonsense.

good clear argument i see. Well explained.

 

[TRF_Cymro]

I promised myself I won't wade in to this debate but some of the stuff on this ... well ...

*rolls up sleeves*

Well that is a fair expectation isn't it and I answered the question. Why does Hore deserve to get more than similar incidents?

Why shouldn't he? Outside of the pitch what Hore did was assault, Hore deserves a lengthy ban. He is lucky he didn't cause even more damaged to Bradley Davies. He's a coward also, hitting him from behind. Fact remains NZ guys get really uptight about these things. If it was a Welsh player I would want to see a long ban because acts of cynical foul play have NO place on the rugby pitch.

good clear argument i see. Well explained.

You are attempting create a conspiracy whilst also trying to justify Hore's actions. Quite frankly I dunno if you are being real or being a WUM.

 

[dullonien]

The point is with the Thomson incident much of your media said "there is an international conspiracy in world rugby for the All Blacks. If Thomson played for any other country he would have got five or six weeks."

This week we hear "Hore is just a typical All Blacks thug. The All Blacks are always doing this kind of stuff and getting away with it."

I don't know how those comments aren't going to make us angry. Most All Blacks fans agree that Hore is a thug and that he deserved a red card and several weeks on the sideline. What we don't like are comments from your media insinuating that the IRB is biased towards us (why on earth would they be?) We also don't like being called thugs when we have only ever seen two red cards in the history of international rugby. Admittedly, we should have had one more yesterday and two more in 2005. However, we are clearly no more thuggish than any other country. Greyling is relevant because it shows that decisions go both for and against us. It is also relevant because it shows that the NH media are hypocritical. They do not care about foul play by a South African on a New Zealander but go crazy when it is a New Zealander on one of their own. In New Zealand we believe that this type of journalistic behaviour is designed to cover up the NH appalling record against the All Blacks and their inherent jealousy that a team from the other side of the world is so much better than them.

If you haven't worked out that the media all over the world are full of sensationalist cr*p then I'm not sure you're going to enjoy life very much. Don't get up in arms about what a bunch of idiot journalists write in an attempt to create controversy and shift papers. What does this have to do with anything?

Well Greyling got a week for a very similar incident on McCaw, so if the shoe was on the other foot I would expect Hore to get a week. What did Powell get for trying to decapitate MCaw last time we were in Wales? That was very similar too. So somehwere between the 1 week Greyling got and whatever Powell got is what I would expect Hore to get if he did this against MCaw.

The Andy Powell incident was bad as well. But there is still a big difference between a high tackle that is often a reactionary thing that happens in the heat of the moment, and a deliberate cheap shot from behind. Things happen in the heat of the moment, I remember tackling someone high during a sports lesson in school, not on purpose, just something that happened by mistake as the guy stepped me.

This thread is turning to sh*t unfortunately.

Why shouldn't he? Outside of the pitch what Hore did was assault, Hore deserves a lengthy ban. He is lucky he didn't cause even more damaged to Bradley Davies. He's a coward also, hitting him from behind. Fact remains NZ guys get really uptight about these things. If it was a Welsh player I would want to see a long ban because acts of cynical foul play have NO place on the rugby pitch.

Well said. I wanted Bradley Davies banned for longer than he got after his incident against Ireland in the 6 nations. I don't care what came before, it was unacceptable.

 

[big ginger 8]

The point is with the Thomson incident much of your media said "there is an international conspiracy in world rugby for the All Blacks. If Thomson played for any other country he would have got five or six weeks."

This week we hear "Hore is just a typical All Blacks thug. The All Blacks are always doing this kind of stuff and getting away with it."

I don't know how those comments aren't going to make us angry. Most All Blacks fans agree that Hore is a thug and that he deserved a red card and several weeks on the sideline. What we don't like are comments from your media insinuating that the IRB is biased towards us (why on earth would they be?) We also don't like being called thugs when we have only ever seen two red cards in the history of international rugby. Admittedly, we should have had one more yesterday and two more in 2005. However, we are clearly no more thuggish than any other country. Greyling is relevant because it shows that decisions go both for and against us. It is also relevant because it shows that the NH media are hypocritical. They do not care about foul play by a South African on a New Zealander but go crazy when it is a New Zealander on one of their own. In New Zealand we believe that this type of journalistic behaviour is designed to cover up the NH appalling record against the All Blacks and their inherent jealousy that a team from the other side of the world is so much better than them.

Seriously? Do you read "the NH media"? Or do you just see the odd article by idiots like Stephen Jones designed to annoy people? Do you realise the NH media is not one body. I haven't seen a single article calling all nz players thugs.

 

[donmcdazzle]

If you haven't worked out that the media all over the world are full of sensationalist cr*p then I'm not sure you're going to enjoy life very much. Don't get up in arms about what a bunch of idiot journalists write in an attempt to create controversy and shift papers. What does this have to do with anything?



The Andy Powell incident was bad as well. But there is still a big difference between a high tackle that is often a reactionary thing that happens in the heat of the moment, and a deliberate cheap shot from behind. Things happen in the heat of the moment, I remember tackling someone high during a sports lesson in school, not on purpose, just something that happened by mistake as the guy stepped me.

This thread is turning to sh*t unfortunately.

There is almost no difference between Powell and Hore. They both tried to hit the opposite player in the head and succeeded.

 

[lucky number 7]

It was perfectly legal guys...anybody who says any different is clearly a sissy.