Potential citings for Quarterfinals

[RedruthRFC]

Disagree 100%. What you state as a fact i'm afraid i see as a no such thing. It is not only not pointless but an essential part of games's rules, not only rugby, but sports in general. The judicial principles at stake here are called equality before the law and accountability.

In which case, can you direct me to other bans handed out under similar enough circumstances to enable us to decide if this ban is consistent with others please?

I for one, would like to be explained how the panel suddenly develope mind reading abilities in order to assess Tuilagi's intention to raise his leg to hit the japanese player

I must be the only person on the planet (other than the judicial officer) who thought that Tuilagi's breaking of his gait in order to bring his knee up at an unnatural angle looked rather strange. I haven't read the transcript of this hearing. Did either party think to ask a kinesiologist's (or similar sports science expert) opinion? I'm not sure where the burden of proof lies in this instance, but if whichever it lies with failed to do so, I would allege incompetence.

I'd like know why O'Brien's citing ended up with this statement at rugbyworldcup.com

The Judicial Officer took into account compelling mitigating factors including O'Brien's conduct prior to and at the hearing, his remorse, good character and clean disciplinary record, and reduced the suspension to a period of one week.

and how on earth they reconcile that phrase with this video, which shows him punching another player before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI1M0EeIgdg[/QUOTE]

As far as I'm aware, this incident didn't result in a disciplinary, hence the clean disciplinary record.

Considering that decision could have very well resulted in a completely different game (14 vs 15 for pretty much the entire game), i would also like to know why the TMO of that game missed all the signals to check that. I'd also like to know what is being done for this not to happen again.

I can see both sides of this. As I said on the "standard of refereeing" thread, TMOs are only one man with one pair of eyes. If you take the time to review the match footage broadcast, you will see that the camera cut away from the incident to show the French scrum half getting the ball out of the ruck. Play then continues for more than a minute before a penalty is awarded to France. If the TMO watches the same feed as us at home as a matter of course, he would have been aware of Pape's injury, but would have presumably been following live play. However there was then a fairly lengthy stoppage while Pape received treatment during which time he could have been checking to make sure that the injury wasn't caused by foul play. It is worth noting that contrary to the conspiracy theories about a cover up, the punch was mentioned in the commentary, but it took the ITV bods all of the time off, plus the time it took for the penalty kick to touch to identify and broadcast the footage. Presumably there are guidelines as to how the TMO should be using the time afforded to him by breaks in play, as well as guidelines as to how many phases or how much time he can go back to highlight an incident. As I'm not party to such details, I find it impossible to say whether the TMO did a poor job or not.

People who have nothing to hide should have no problem in explaining themselves, particulary in positions of power.

Who has a problem explaining themselves? Only the conspiracy theorists and wounded parties as far as I can see. World Rugby have been laudable in publishing very complete details of hearings.

- - - Updated - - -

o'brien is going to appeal today apparently, could be back for sunday.

Maybe there are good grounds for the appeal that I'm not aware of, in which case I apologise, but as I see it, he is bang to rights and has received a punishment very slightly on the lenient end of the scale, so I hope a fatuous appeal like this results in an increased ban (not that it will). Nothing against Ireland or SOB, I said the same when Galarza appealed. Surely reducing the ban from the current level would necessitate proving that he didn't punch Pape.....maybe the IRU have employed OJ Simpson's legal team!

Thinking about it, isn't there something to say that bans can't be reduced below the LE minimum (which is frequently played fast and loose with)? It would be a giggle if this was realised and lead to an increase accordingly.

 

[RedruthRFC]

I would like to see a new sanction on the books... call it provocation.

I am reading here a lot of rhetoric about how SOB was "lucky" to get only one week, but IMO the luckiest player was Pape, who got no sanction - other that the one handed out by SOB - for provoking him with an off the ball act that is completely outside the spirit of the game, and a controvention of Law 10.4 (m)

[TEXTAREA](m) Acts contrary to good sportsmanship. A player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship in the playing enclosure.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/TEXTAREA]

A number of posters appear to be engaging in reductio ad absurdum, but I follow what you're saying - if a tough stance was taken on this kind of nonsense, the game would be cleaned up significantly.

Had this incident been spotted in real time, I think that most would consider that a yellow card for Pape would have been harsh, but personally, given the element of gamesmanship (i.e. he wasn't doing it to gain an advantage other than winding SOB up) and the sexual nature of the contact, I could make my peace with it. Are citing officers meant to refer anything that they believe is a yellow or worse or are they just concerned with red card offences?

 

[daluaine]

Interesting. Footage from an actual citing tribunal:

[video]https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1215915215088989[/video]

 

[RedruthRFC]

Interesting. Footage from an actual citing tribunal:

[video]https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1215915215088989[/video]

Is this what it appears to be - a Scotsman implying that his team are in fact a tier 2 nation? Wonders will never cease!

 

[daluaine]

Is this what it appears to be - a Scotsman implying that his team are in fact a tier 2 nation? Wonders will never cease!

Well Scotland are still below England in the World Rankings so we must be?

 

[RedruthRFC]

Well Scotland are still below England in the World Rankings so we must be?

For fear of derailing an already out of control thread, what does being tier 1 / 2 actually mean? As far as I can see, all it means is that you play in the 6N or RC.

If it's any more meaningful than this, surely the top 10 in the world at any one time should be referred to as tier 1.

 

[valley commando]

o'brien is going to appeal today apparently, could be back for sunday.

Is he stupid ? how can he appeal he punched Pape, no excuses he should man up and take his punishment, whats his defence going to be ?

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Is he genuinely appealing?!
I hope they increase his ban back to 2 weeks for being such a bellend.

 

[valley commando]

Disagree 100%. What you state as a fact i'm afraid i see as a no such thing. It is not only not pointless but an essential part of games's rules, not only rugby, but sports in general. The judicial principles at stake here are called equality before the law and accountability.

Of course each incident has its own set of circumstances and context, but you could argue the exact same thing about knock-ons, forward pases and off sides, yet the rules for that are pretty much applied across the board with a consistent (most of the times) penalty for infringement.

The problem with regarding it as pointless is that sounds like a cheap scapegoat for people who judge to avoid accountability.

I for one, would like to be explained how the panel suddenly develope mind reading abilities in order to assess Tuilagi's intention to raise his leg to hit the japanese player, while at the same time they completely disregard Pocock's knee to the body.
I'd like know why O'Brien's citing ended up with this statement at rugbyworldcup.com

The Judicial Officer took into account compelling mitigating factors including O’Brien’s conduct prior to and at the hearing, his remorse, good character and clean disciplinary record, and reduced the suspension to a period of one week.

and how on earth they reconcile that phrase with this video, which shows him punching another player before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI1M0EeIgdg

Considering that decision could have very well resulted in a completely different game (14 vs 15 for pretty much the entire game), i would also like to know why the TMO of that game missed all the signals to check that. I'd also like to know what is being done for this not to happen again. I'd be furious if i were French (no pun intended )

People who have nothing to hide should have no problem in explaining themselves, particulary in positions of power.
If you can't or won't explain the rationale behind rulings and sanctions you lose fan support. Maybe not much, but it's not good for the sport. And to be honest, i don't think it's too much we're asking for. Common sense, that's all.

Good Post

- - - Updated - - -

Are seriously insane? Provocation is SUBJECTIVE!!!!!! Anything depending on the persona can be considered a provocation!!! Hiting someone is OBJECTIVE .If someone insults you on the road, you will crash him cos he provoked you? WTF is that way of thinking?
Rugby became yesterday the first collective sport in wich hiting an oponent to hurt him out of any playin context is NORMAL and REWARDED.
This is pathetic, whoever it is, whatever nationality, this kind of behaviour is to get rid off in ALL SPORTS. Anyone thinking the opposite is a retard.
Even in tennis players provoke themselves, this is called mind game, and overcoming this is sign of intelligence.
The worse is if Pape was the one who hit obrien, there would be absolutely no debat on why he did it.
Being fairplay and honest are values that disapear at the speed of light in this sport.
Shoking reactions by those who defend Obrien.
There is no excuse for that. This kind of attitude on a field, is the worse rugby can offer to the world. And excusing it, is even worse.

- - - Updated - - -



Obviously this player shouldnt be able to play this sport. If you cant stand contact or to be held in rugby , just play darts. But he s clean lol, so keep going, nothing to see here.

I agree with your comments to a point, I think we all know that when you play rugby there are some of us who will do our best to wind certain opposition players up, especially those we suspect may have a short fuse, we do so in the hope that they may overstep the line and therefore we can gain an advantage, as you say it happens in other sports and is part and parcel of why we love rugby, however I also have no problem with the player who retaliates, I've done it myself, the difference being if you get caught you should take the punishment, SOB apparently intends on appealing this I disagree with.
Best of luck against the AB's





SOB is going to appeal

 

[RedruthRFC]

Is he stupid ? how can he appeal he punched Pape, no excuses he should man up and take his punishment, whats his defence going to be ?

I'd be very surprised if it's his decision. Time will tell what the defence is, but it's hard to imagine that it will be anything that could overturn the decision as that would mean proving that he didn't punch Pape!

 

[Saint4805]

I'd be very suspicious if they appeal. It suggests to me that they may have received 'off the record assurances' that the ban won't be increased in the event of the appeal otherwise it would be an incredibly reckless and irresponsible move.

 

[OverGore]

" i saw an asian hornet on Papé's belly, i feared so much for him, i instantly decide to act and save him from a vicious insect. So i smashed it as hard as i could so it didnt have the time to release pheromones and attract other hornets.
All in all, Pape's should thank me cos i saved him from a bad pain, and if the gardener of cardiff cant keep his field out of any hornets, why would i be reponsible? So please, be serious and erase my punishment. Thx very much, sean."

 

[big ginger 8]

People should probably look for sources before jumping to hysteria. Feek was asked would they appeal and simply said they'd wait for the written judgement before passing it onto their legal advisor before making a decision. The exact same process used in every citing by every team I would imagine.

http://www.the42.ie/ireland-sean-obrien-ban-cite-2388342-Oct2015/

 

[smartcooky]

And how do you deal with insults ? It is a provocation as much as anything else...It will be word against word. How do you punish all the helding back always hapening in a ruck ?

No seriously this is impossible what you are asking.

I have seen players hold opponents down in a ruck and/or tackle, and penalised them for it

I have heard players throw some vile insults at opponents, and sat them on the naughty step for doing so.

When you are out in the middle with a whistle, you see and hear a lot more than those who have never done so might imagine.

You are not goiung to catch everybody, but you take a no tolerance approach to what you DO see!

 

[Mcfadden]

And how do you deal with insults ? It is a provocation as much as anything else...It will be word against word. How do you punish all the helding back always hapening in a ruck ?

No seriously this is impossible what you are asking.

- - - Updated - - -



You see this is exactly the issue. And this is the same thing with the surrendering thing. You are always playing it as a banter but in fact this is not, this is deeply seeded (hammered if I may say) in the mind of all not very educated brit/irish and their descendance (prisonners or others sort of).

French are violent and surrendering monkeys.

When we come to a brit/irish (or prisonner descendance of these) commissionner or a referee, the result (the consequences of this hammering) is simple : the frenchie always take more in his face and if we can avoid to show some videos or replays during the match, this is not a big deal, he is only a french.

This is all this Brit (or cousins or descendance. same pot) arrogance that is at work here and rugby is hugely impacted by this sadly. As said, it has improved a bit nowadays as rugby became more international but still, old habits stays.

And this is a french that is living in brit land since loooong years that is saying this.

I never made any reference or offensive joke about surrendering. Those are your words, or someone else's words.

But there are a couple of teams more than any that get away with eye gouging, winding the opposition up by wrapping their hands around their neck or ballsack. Not sure how long you've watched rugby for but it's happened for a long time now. You realise one of your players attempted to devour McCaws eyes in the RWC final in 2011 but the ABs didn't lay a complaint because they won? It's not that I hate the French, or anyone else. I'm just stating facts.

 

[smartcooky]

Are seriously insane? Provocation is SUBJECTIVE!!!!!!

What a complete and utter load of tosh.

Eye-gouging, something you Frenchies excel at (yes, I'm looking at you, Richard Nones, and David Attoub, and Daniel Larrechea and Olivier Azam, and Julien Dupuy, and Aurelien Rougerie, and Morgan Parra) is provocation, and it is OBJECTIVE!!!!!!

Grabbing and ripping an opponent's ball sack is provocation, and it is OBJECTIVE!!!!!!

Fiddling with an opponent's arse is provocation (and a disgusting piece of behaviour), and it is OBJECTIVE!!!!!!

- - - Updated - - -

A number of posters appear to be engaging in reductio ad absurdum, but I follow what you're saying - if a tough stance was taken on this kind of nonsense, the game would be cleaned up significantly.

Had this incident been spotted in real time, I think that most would consider that a yellow card for Pape would have been harsh, but personally, given the element of gamesmanship (i.e. he wasn't doing it to gain an advantage other than winding SOB up) and the sexual nature of the contact, I could make my peace with it. Are citing officers meant to refer anything that they believe is a yellow or worse or are they just concerned with red card offences?

Citing Officers can give a "Citing Officer warning" for behviour or acts of foul play that were either missed or only penalised by the referee, and in the CO's opinion, merit a yellow card (and don't meet the threshold for a red card). This is effectively an "off field yellow card" and is recorded as a yellow card on the player's disciplinary record. Such a warning cam come back to bite the player as three yellow cards on their record will result in an automatic one match suspension.

However, what I am suggesting is taking it further. If a player is seen to provoke an opponent who then responds with a punch (or other act of foul play in retaliation,) then IMO they should both get a yellow card (the on field penalty would still go against the retaliator) and if the retaliator is later cited, then so should the provoker - under Law 10.4 (m)

A player who provokes an opponent has to be made to realise that if the opponet responds to his provocation, he himself is also likely to suffer some off-field consequences

 

[OverGore]

So eye gouging is something player are punished for when they are caught right? so why compare something that is precisely normal to something that isnt?
So should we understand that punching a french player is ok cos the entire nation is eyegouging the other teams? All teams are clean right? U incarnate exactly what makes this sport amateur. Diifernt rules depending on what nation u play for, according to all stereotypes possible.
I repeat, defending O brien is retarded. Punchin someoen on field is no way.
The way u only suggest only 2 nations on earth have this kind of behaviour is so ridiculous.
As i said , honesty and fairplay are fargone from this sport. If pape had claimed an injury, this woudl have been more weeks, but wtf is rugby doing? So if he broke a rib, maybe he woudl have take 2 weeks? This is pure insanity!!

Objective is also meaning "against the rules" and reprehensible. In all rucks and scrum all over planet people grabsd each other arse or balls, so come on. If we rule the no ass touchin, we cant even make scrums or mauls; this is ridiculous. He punched him to hurt him, period. Provocations etc, pure bs. 5yo excuse.
Dupuy i found his punishment NORMAL, Attoub as well, if you need to be specifically from a nation to be shocked by violence we disagree even more. To justify this 1 week he took , you dispatch some old **** french players did, and of course consider no other nation ever had one cited for the same reasons, come on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dupuy cos of his retardness is out of any international games for his LIFE. That s paying for it and it is NORMAL.
U think all came by itself too on Ulster SF that day? Match was a shame of provocations and bad blows from each part. BUT the stupidest ones got nervous and fukked up, and got caught and took punishment wich again is NORMAL.
Considering the nationality in this is monkeysm.
Any player from ANY country doing this kind of ****t on field must be seriously punished, period.
Rest is monkey talk.

 

[pat mcgroin]

Is he stupid ? how can he appeal he punched Pape, no excuses he should man up and take his punishment, whats his defence going to be ?

He is not going to appeal punching Pape! dont be silly he is going to plead a moment of insanity. That usually works on TV anyway

 

[smartcooky]

I'd be very surprised if it's his decision. Time will tell what the defence is, but it's hard to imagine that it will be anything that could overturn the decision as that would mean proving that he didn't punch Pape!

Maybe they will cite this as a precedent...



Both players were cited; Michael Rhodes for the neck twist, and Siale Piutau for the retaliatory punch

Piutau was let off with no suspension. His defence was severe provocation.

Rhodes got six weeks for the neck twist (later reduced to four weeks on appeal)

 

[TobesHodges]

That neck twist is horrible.. Understandable for the reaction..