• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Hartley cited

big ginger 8 said:
You can bite someone's finger off that's worse than a punch.
Click to expand...

You can kill someone with a punch, cause them brain damage, do bad things to their kidneys, smash someones windpipe...

With a bite you can bite someones ear, nose or finger off. In terms of long lasting/life threatening damage what do you think is worse???

And you would really have to bite someone very, very hard to bite their finger off.
 
The thing about punching is that rugby players aren't very good at it.
It is very rare that a punch actually does damage in rugby. The best punch in recent times was the Tuilagi on Ashton punch, It didn't even knock him to the floor. The only long(ish) term injury I can remember from a punch was BO'D in 07 and that was only three weeks.

Also it is very easy to lose control of yourself and throw a punch it takes a thug to bite someone.
 
racingmetrofan said:
You can kill someone with a punch, cause them brain damage, do bad things to their kidneys, smash someones windpipe...

With a bite you can bite someones ear, nose or finger off. In terms of long lasting/life threatening damage what do you think is worse???

And you would really have to bite someone very, very hard to bite their finger off.
Click to expand...

I was joking. Also as cmac pointed out when is a proper punch ever thrown in rugby? Very rarely is a really dangerous one thrown usually it's grappling. No one wants to make a strike but a bite is simething some scumbags would think they can get away with. Biting a finger off is easier than you'd think.
 
I cannot wait to read the report when it comes out.

Ends his season but will be back for the Summer Tests.
 
At least he'll get a nice rest for South Africa.
 
That's strange it says the lowest suspension for biting is 12 weeks...
 
welshglory said:
That's strange it says the lowest suspension for biting is 12 weeks...
Click to expand...

It was for 'An act contrary to good sportsmanship' rather than 'biting'. I don't know if there's an offense called 'biting' but if there is then that's not what he's been done for.

Really want to see this report. I presume we don't get it until after any appeal?
 
Very peculiar. If he didn't bite him then what the hell is he supposed to have done!
 
Was reduced by 4 weeks because of 'mitigation'.

Report is due out end of the week.
 
welshglory said:
Very peculiar. If he didn't bite him then what the hell is he supposed to have done!
Click to expand...

Sucked his finger in a sexually provocative manner!

tumblr_ky94it84ch1qa1rot.jpg
 

Attachments

  • tumblr_ky94it84ch1qa1rot.jpg
    tumblr_ky94it84ch1qa1rot.jpg
    50.5 KB · Views: 3
Didn't this happen with Grewcock, or someone: he bit someone, but there was no tv/picture evidence so they gave him a reduced ban

Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk
 
I don't understand, how can you ban someone with no evidence?
 
If they had evidence it would probably be a much longer ban i would think
 
j'nuh said:
I don't understand, how can you ban someone with no evidence?
Click to expand...

The evidence would be based on the statement provided by Ferris. Information by the match officials and comments Ferris made during the game. I also think I am right in saying Ferris showed the ref a mark in his finger at the time which was consistant with a bite injury. Also the account given by Dylan Hartley would form some kind of evidence.
 
So in conclusion, all the evidence points to "Sir! Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir!"

Farcical.
 

Latest posts

Top