EOYT: Wales vs New Zealand, 24/11/2012

[Zed]

No, I'm saying that due to the way these things work, he could be handed a worse punishment by apologising. I think everyone would agree that he'll be trying to get the smallest ban possible, which is probably why he hasn't apologised. If you'd read my previous posts you'd see I think Hore deserves to have the book thrown at him, but don't let that get in the way of a good witch hunt.

Yeah I'm sure the lawyers get involved as soon as these incidents happen and tell the players/coaches etc exactly what they can and cannot say. I think if Hore actually publicly apologised the NZRU would cut his balls off. Still, it would be nice to see a player stick his hand up and say sorry once in a while.

 

[Helmy]

Yeah I'm sure the lawyers get involved as soon as these incidents happen and tell the players/coaches etc exactly what they can and cannot say. I think if Hore actually publicly apologised the NZRU would cut his balls off. Still, it would be nice to see a player stick his hand up and say sorry once in a while.

In which case it's whether the player wants to listen to their lawyers or their PR team. I'd say the PR guys are probably tearing their hair out at the media reaction.

 

[William18]

Amazing, Davies was the one attacked here, yet you turn around and make it about Mccaw. Amazing.

Anyway DON, i was pretty much not around back then, BUT those attacks on Mccaw were deplorable. But ok, its always about Mccaw ey, since it happened to him, that means its ok that it happened to Davies.

And if you missed out on my other posts, Greylings Attack on Mccaw WAS condemned publicly by both the springbok captain and the coach. Something that the AB management has not, or refused, to do. Somehow its the ABs who are the victims here.

McCaw is brought up because it shows that everything does not go our way and we are sometimes on the receiving end of thuggish action. I think you are struggling to get this point. The vast majority of New Zealanders do not care what anyone says about Andrew Hore. Most of us have said that it was a thuggish action which deserved strict punishment. What we do care about are people saying "that's just another typical All Blacks thug". Don't you see? We are not defending Hore, we are defending our country.

I do agree that their should have been more reaction from Hansen and Hore publically. Hopefully, we will see this after the case has been heard.

 

[nickdnz]

McCaw is brought up because it shows that everything does not go our way and we are sometimes on the receiving end of thuggish action. I think you are struggling to get this point. The vast majority of New Zealanders do not care what anyone says about Andrew Hore. Most of us have said that it was a thuggish action which deserved strict punishment. What we do care about are people saying "that's just another typical All Blacks thug". Don't you see? We are not defending Hore, we are defending our country.

I do agree that their should have been more reaction from Hansen and Hore publically. Hopefully, we will see this after the case has been heard.

Yep - agree. Really appreciated Heyneke Meyer condeming Greylings actions and taking in house disciplinary actions (especially considering Greyling only got one week). Unfortunately I don't think Hansen is the kind of coach to make an example of a player - which I can't think is helped by the reactions of the press as he's nothing if not defensive.

 

[dullonien]

Kovana,

Come on now mate we are all entitled to an opinion and i stand by mine.

Why should hore apologize? He hasnt even been through the judiciary yet. I will be very suprised if we see any thing of the sort from hore. And the AB camp cant condemn the incident as im sure as i stated earlier that they condoned it in the first place. They werent going to take these welshies running obstruction like that and fair enough aswell.

Dumbest post of the year right here.

Edit. haha, and I +repped you by mistake. Small freebee for you.

 

[SelimNiai]

Only got 5 week ban. Pisstake. So he's only really banned for the England game. And according to the blind halfwit citing div he "didn't intend to conect with the head" Yeah and I'm Mrs Thatcher.

The sooner bans become "x" number of games the better.

 

[Zed]

Don't you see? We are not defending Hore, we are defending our country.

But you start doing that and it ends up sounding like you are defending Hore, whether you are or not. And why should you care if someone is calling the ABs a bunch of thugs because it's going to be someone that has no idea about the game or is simply saying that to get a rise.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Only got 5 week ban. Pisstake. So he's only really banned for the England game. And according to the blind halfwit citing div he "didn't intend to conect with the head" Yeah and I'm Mrs Thatcher.

The sooner bans become "x" number of games the better.

Or... The number of weeks only count in active rugby weeks. Meaning he will serve week 1 of his ban now, the other 4 when the season starts again in February

 

[SelimNiai]

Either way 5 is not enough. And since its been mentioned the Davies tip on the Irish player got 7 weeks and as has been pointed out they are equally bad yet Hore gets less. I'll say no more and let you draw your own theories /comclusions (which btw, if theyre the same as mine you are correct)

 

[TPenn]

Either way 5 is not enough. And since its been mentioned the Davies tip on the Irish player got 7 weeks and as has been pointed out they are equally bad yet Hore gets less. I'll say no more and let you draw your own theories /comclusions (which btw, if theyre the same as mine you are correct)

Not sure they are equally as bad. The Davies tip tackle could have paralysed someone.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

5 weeks seems about right or even heavy if you look at recent simmilar bans; Greyling 1 week also for striking At the end of the day the citings and bannings are highly irregular and have been the source of disgruntlement for some time now and someone is always going to feel the result is unfair.

Maybe Greyling got off easier because he was carded in the game as well? I don't know, the whole thing is just too untransparent and up in the air if you ask me for the purposes of making comparisons.

 

[Teh Mite]

Bans should be measured in games, not weeks. A 16 week ban would still only act as 1 week for some players now.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Yes, but if you change the ban-system, and ban players for matches in stead of weeks, does that count for the matches within the competition where the cited incident took place? For instance:

If Hore would be suspended now for 5 games, would that only be the following 5 Test matches NZ plays or will he also be banned for the Super Rugby matches his team plays?

And if you turn it around. If, for instance, Liam Gill (Australia) gets cited for a tip-tackle when he plays for the Reds in Super Rugby right before the Lions tour, and he is suspended for 3 matches... Robbie Deans can call up Gill and he can sit out his suspension with the Wallabies so he doesn't have to miss a single match for the Reds. That way he is eligible to play again once the Aussie teams resume the Super Rugby season.

The banning by weeks-approach is not a bad one, but it should only apply to active weeks of rugby. For Hore, this means his remaining 4 weeks of suspension would be active once the new season starts in New Zealand, where he is based.

 

[oldscumbagonian]

The ban runs until 24 February - so he misses three games for the Highlanders as well as the England game. Apparently it was an 8-week ban but reduced to five given a number of mitigating factors including "[Hore's] daily contact with Davies since the incident". This suggests he apologised to Davies on Sunday at the hospital.

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Son of a Hore.

 

[Teh Mite]

The weeks system peanalises clubs instead of test sides. An 8 week ban at the end of a test series has no baring on the next test, but impares the club totally. Therefore the national coaches work to make sure the ban ends before the next test match (e.g. Hartley with the Ferris bite incident). A split total/competition ban, so the next x amount in all rugby and % of in I the competition the ban was earned in running concurrent would act as a better deterrent (so e.g. An 8 week ban becomes 8 matches from all teams, plus say the next 2 if earned in the Heineken cup or test rugby etc.)

 

[SelimNiai]

A tip for everyone there. If you are about to be sentenced you can say you are "sorry" and you pretty much get away with it. Who needs lawyers anyway.

 

[Draggs]

I cannot wait to hear what Stephen Jones/TSF have to say.
It is better than Munsterfans at times.

 

[Rhyer]

5 weeks seems fair, even a little harsh considering all the strikes and eye gouging that has gone unnoticed with no repercussions. I would have given him 3 weeks.

 

[Big Ewis]

man isn't having that last name enough punishment for an entire lifetime ??!!