Aviva Premiership 16/17 - Round 8 and 9

[Which Tyler]

Pleaded guilty, and gets 3 weeks.
I... don't understand the world sometimes.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Pleaded guilty, and gets 3 weeks.
I... don't understand the world sometimes.

Do you have a link to a statement on this please? The small article on the BBC website doesn't make a lot of sense. It says that it was assessed as mid range, which makes sense to me - it wasn't exactly off the top of the ropes WWE style, but it was more than just lashing out and was against a player on the ground who may or may not have been able to defend himself. According to the most up to date reference I can find, a mid range offence warrants a 5 week ban. All I can assume is that there was sufficient mitigation to warrant a 2 week reduction. The article also says that the incident wasn't premeditated, but was intentional. Am I being daft of does this make little sense to anyone else? I can't imagine him taking to the field thinking "I'll wait until DOC is on the deck and drop the elbow on him" (how would the disciplinary determine that this was the case anyway?), so something like this could never be premeditated in that sense. He did however see his opportunity for a pretty cowardly attack and made the decision to take it. Doesn't this imply premeditation in this context?

All I can assume is that his guilty plea, coupled with him saying sorry and wearing a nice suit and speaking in a nice accent is all sufficiently compelling to not just counterbalance, but outweigh a ban for breaking someone's arm and a red card for punching a player unable to defend himself. If I'm right in my assumptions, it is indeed a strange world!

I've said before, to my mind, showing contrition and conducting yourself well at the hearing should be what's expected of players, not something that is rewarded with a reduced ban.

 

[Which Tyler]

Err. It's the ***le of the BBC article I read
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/38086289

Reduced by 50% for saying sorry

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Reduced by 50% for saying sorry

Completely insane considering his history

 

[RedruthRFC]

Err. It's the ***le of the BBC article I read
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/38086289

Reduced by 50% for saying sorry

That's the same article I was referring to, complete with all the strange elements that I pointed out. As I say, mid range for striking (be it first or elbow) is 5 weeks, so if that is indeed what he's been found guilty of, the ban is reduced by 40%.

- - - Updated - - -

Completely insane considering his history

Agreed. I'm 99% sure that they will have considered his previous, so what's insane is that saying sorry massively outweighs his previous. How much would they have reduced the ban by if he had a good disciplinary record?

 

[ncurd]

The player's remorse before the panel was genuine and heartfelt.

See I'd buy that angle if it wasn't for his record.

Repeat offenders should at maximum get 1 week taken off thier ban for a guilty plea. If its been a significant time (something like twice as many months as their ban was in days) passed since their last ban the disciplinary committee can consider remorse and guilty plea for 50% reduction in tariff.

Clark should get maximum -1 week for the rest of his career.

 

[Every Time Ref]

Do you have a link to a statement on this please? The small article on the BBC website doesn't make a lot of sense. It says that it was assessed as mid range, which makes sense to me - it wasn't exactly off the top of the ropes WWE style, but it was more than just lashing out and was against a player on the ground who may or may not have been able to defend himself. According to the most up to date reference I can find, a mid range offence warrants a 5 week ban. All I can assume is that there was sufficient mitigation to warrant a 2 week reduction. The article also says that the incident wasn't premeditated, but was intentional. Am I being daft of does this make little sense to anyone else? I can't imagine him taking to the field thinking "I'll wait until DOC is on the deck and drop the elbow on him" (how would the disciplinary determine that this was the case anyway?), so something like this could never be premeditated in that sense. He did however see his opportunity for a pretty cowardly attack and made the decision to take it. Doesn't this imply premeditation in this context?

All I can assume is that his guilty plea, coupled with him saying sorry and wearing a nice suit and speaking in a nice accent is all sufficiently compelling to not just counterbalance, but outweigh a ban for breaking someone's arm and a red card for punching a player unable to defend himself. If I'm right in my assumptions, it is indeed a strange world!

I've said before, to my mind, showing contrition and conducting yourself well at the hearing should be what's expected of players, not something that is rewarded with a reduced ban.

Amen brother, I've been saying this for years. Does anyone really think the "remorse" players express after these incidents is heartfelt or makes a scrap of difference?!

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I've been saying for a while that they shouldn't remove weeks under any circumstances.
Minimum ban should be minimum ban, you still infringed regardless of how sorry you felt after.
If you're a prick, or have history, then they should increase the ban, but never reduce for good behaviour.

 

[ncurd]

but never reduce for good behaviour.

I dunno if you're a Launchers with an impeccable record and reputation that has to count for something. I think they are too quick to reduce I've got no problem with it in the right circumstances.

 

[RedruthRFC]

I dunno if you're a Launchers with an impeccable record and reputation that has to count for something. I think they are too quick to reduce I've got no problem with it in the right circumstances.

Agreed, I think that in the context of this thread, "good behaviour" = showing contrition and turning up at the hearing wearing the right school tie. This is what I meant when I said that this should be expected if you want to get what's coming your way, not a harsher sanction. I still agree with a player with a genuinely good disciplinary record getting a reduction on that basis.

Following on, can anyone recall the last time a player received an increased sanction based on their poor previous record? I can't.

 

[Raggs]

Didn't Ashton get 13 weeks for his latest thing due to his "hands around the eyes that no one else has been punished for since" sentence?

Sentence cannot go below 50%, therefore a 5 week starting point can get no lower than 3 weeks. Clarke has kept his nose clean since the Hawkins thing, so I can understand him getting the grace period back in some ways.

 

[TommiG88]

Lose at home to Newcastle. Well done Mallinder. He played the excuses before the game with internationals being away. Very few first teamers deserve to be internationals these days.

 

[SelimNiai]

Cheeky thread ***le edit

We lost with a LBP at home to the Tigers, we played pretty well if the commentary is to believed, Leicester just executed better than we did, played a more intellegent game where it mattered. 2 sin bins not helping our cause, though the Woodward one was dubious by the sound of it.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

It was a pretty dull game Wigglesworth missed alot and was crap in general.

Bris POV good defence but shocking under high ball.

Saints lost LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

[Which Tyler]

Sunday 3.15 BTSport

Harlequins team
15. Aaron Morris
14. Marland Yarde
13. Alofa Alofa
12. Joe Marchant
11. Tim Visser
10. Nick Evans (C)
9. Karl Dickson

1. Mark Lambert
2. Rob Buchanan
3. Will Collier
4. George Merrick
5. Charlie Matthews
6. James Chisholm
7. Luke Wallace
8. Jack Clifford

16. Dave Ward
17. Dan Murphy
18. Adam Jones
19. Stan South
20. George Naoupu
21. Charlie Mulchrone
22. Tim Swiel
23. Charlie Walker

Bath
15. Tom Homer
14. Semesa Rokoduguni
13. Max Clark
12. Ben Tapuai
11. Aled Brew
10. Dan Bowden
9. Darren Allinson

1. Nathan Catt
2. Tom Dunn
3. Kane Palma-Newport
4. Matt Garvey ( c )
5. Dave Attwood
6. Tom Ellis
7. Guy Mercer
8. Zach Mercer


16. Michael van Vuuren
17. Beno Obano
18. Max Lahiff
19. Paul Grant
20. Levi Douglas
21. Will Homer
22. Adam Hastings
23. Matt Banahan

 

[SelimNiai]

It was a pretty dull game Wigglesworth missed alot and was crap in general.

Bris POV good defence but shocking under high ball.

Saints lost LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Yep, not the first time we've been carved open by the cross kick-pass. The improved defence is encouraging, its getting it for 80 minutes and we're usually a banker for a sin bin period, been a killer that has.

 

[BPM]

Sunday 3.15 BTSport

Harlequins team
15. Aaron Morris
14. Marland Yarde
13. Alofa Alofa
12. Joe Marchant
11. Tim Visser
10. Nick Evans (C)
9. Karl Dickson

1. Mark Lambert
2. Rob Buchanan
3. Will Collier
4. George Merrick
5. Charlie Matthews
6. James Chisholm
7. Luke Wallace
8. Jack Clifford

16. Dave Ward
17. Dan Murphy
18. Adam Jones
19. Stan South
20. George Naoupu
21. Charlie Mulchrone
22. Tim Swiel
23. Charlie Walker

Bath
15. Tom Homer
14. Semesa Rokoduguni
13. Max Clark
12. Ben Tapuai
11. Aled Brew
10. Dan Bowden
9. Darren Allinson

1. Nathan Catt
2. Tom Dunn
3. Kane Palma-Newport
4. Matt Garvey ( c )
5. Dave Attwood
6. Tom Ellis
7. Guy Mercer
8. Zach Mercer


16. Michael van Vuuren
17. Beno Obano
18. Max Lahiff
19. Paul Grant
20. Levi Douglas
21. Will Homer
22. Adam Hastings
23. Matt Banahan

Should be a pretty even game. Both teams are weakened to a similar degree by the international call-ups and injuries. As a Quins fan, I'd say our side looks slightly stronger on paper, so I'm hoping for a home win.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Sale Sharks: 15. Mike Haley, 14. Will Addison, 13. Sam James, 12. Sam Tuitupou, 11. Josh Charnley, 10. AJ MacGinty, 9. Mike Phillips, 1. Ross Harrison, 2. Neil Briggs, 3. Brian Mujati, 4. Bryn Evans, 5. Andrei Ostrikov, 6. TJ Ioane, 7. Ben Curry, 8. Josh Beaumont (capt.)

Replacements: 16. Rob Webber, 17. James Flynn, 18. Halani Aulika, 19. Cameron Neild, 20. Tom Curry, 21. Peter Stringer, 22. Mark Jennings, 23. Tom Arscott

15. Rob Miller 14. Christian Wade 13. Kyle Eastmond 12. Jimmy Gopperth 11. Frank Halai 10. Danny Cipriani 9. Joe Simpson
1. Matt Mullan (c) 2. Tommy Taylor 3. Marty Moore 4. Matt Symons 5. Kearnan Myall 6. Ashley Johnson 7. Thomas Young 8. Alex Rieder


First start for Charnley, and both the Curry bros. involved,
Really like the look of the side.

Wasps fielding 5 players they signed from us, throw in the St Helens vs Wigan derby between Eastmond and Charnley and it could get a bit tasty.
Sammy T will definitely be testing Cipriani out, as he gave up his time to help Cips' defence when he was with us.

Replacements
16. Jack Willis 17. Tom Bristow 18. Phil Swainston 19. Will Rowlands 20. James Gaskell 21. Dan Robson 22. Alapati Leiua 23. Tom Howe

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Is Odogwu injured?

Not looking good so far.

This period is looking costly for you guys currently esp when you would assume it would be a good time for you esp against the likes of Sarries and Wasps who are missing some key men. (Although Wasps not so much).

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Rested
Philips is genuinely terrible, he's so slow at the ruck and his kicking is just shocking. All he's interested in is trying make a break off the back of the ruck