Potential citings for Quarterfinals

[barthelemy]

If it were me hauled up in front of the panel - I'd ask:

"When are you folks going to start punishing those that hold players in stopping them getting back into the defensive line? Till you start doing that, the player's expectation is that it is allowed to be sorted out on the field."

Then, upon banning me, I'd go straight to the nearest reporters and denounce them as a bunch of inept f**kwits that aren't at all capable of administering the laws of the game.

Not too sure what is the point of your posting.

If it was a french player who would have done the same, we would have already seen from all you irish supporters a lot of insults against this french player..."Dirty Scum" blabla...

No, SOB has just punched Pape on the pitch, a proper punch that deserves a proper Ban. And this ban should be until the end of this world cup, which would be fair enough seeing the offense. Nothing to do with any other citing (or no citing) that has happened until now, this one was clear and maybe unprovoked (I mean we do not see if it is provoked or not, what we do see is that there is clear several second where SOB is preparing his punch, this is not an instant reaction to something...)

 

[MunsterMan]

I don't think there was anything in the Pocock incident tbh. Just trying to free himself.

O'Brien was being held too, but will probably get a ban. If we're lucky, it should only be for a week, but his tournament could be over. Nervous times.

 

[TommiG88]

I don't think there was anything in the Pocock incident tbh. Just trying to free himself.

O'Brien was being held too, but will probably get a ban. If we're lucky, it should only be for a week, but his tournament could be over. Nervous times.

He was barely held to be fair.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Its not exactly a sterling start to any defence by rolling out Tuilagi as an example of innocence.

U didn't get it. I wasn't using him as an example of innocence. I was using him as an example of double standards used to judge players' actions.

And tbh, its hard to believe some people are actually using the "but he was being held" argument.

 

[MunsterMan]

And tbh, its hard to believe some people are actually using the "but he was being held" argument.

Was he not being held then?

Pocock was being held. O'Brien was too. That much cannot be argued. From the angle i saw, it didn't look like Pocock connected in any real way. O'Brien definitely did, which is why he is likely to get a ban. I don't think i have said anything controversial or unreasonable.

 

[Amiga500]

Hmm... As much as I agree holding back players off the ball is currently a blight to the sport, I don't think your plan would go too well. In fact, I'm quite sure your ban would be increased to something between six months to a year. Or maybe a rather large fine. Either way, not a good plan.

Probably right! :lol:

- - - Updated - - -

Not too sure what is the point of your posting.

If there is no action being taken off the pitch on players being held back - how can they expect the players not to take action on the pitch?

Unless it is now legal to grapple with the opposition off the ball?

 

[munstermuffin]

Pape stuck a finger up SOBs Arse that was why he struck. And fwiw if there's a citing it probably won't be said until near end of 36hours

 

[MunsterMan]

If it were me hauled up in front of the panel - I'd ask:

"When are you folks going to start punishing those that hold players in stopping them getting back into the defensive line? Till you start doing that, the player's expectation is that it is allowed to be sorted out on the field."

Then, upon banning me, I'd go straight to the nearest reporters and denounce them as a bunch of inept f**kwits that aren't at all capable of administering the laws of the game.

- - - Updated - - -


.

By the way, If i ever get in any legal trouble, you should expect a call. Brilliant!

 

[saulan]

Under tournament rules, the opposing team has 12 hours after the game to cite a player. This did not happen.The citing commissioner appointed to the game has 36 hours.

Based on what RJAH777, and based on these comments by Saint Andre I am almost certain that O'Brien would have been cited by the opposing team.

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rug...for-action-after-sean-o-brien-punch-1.2388586

 

[munstermuffin]

France HAVE NOT cited Sean O'Brien it seems. 12 Hours is up and well if there's nothing by tomorrow morning (realistically if IRFU hear nothing tonight) then he will be free.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Was he not being held then?

Pocock was being held. O'Brien was too. That much cannot be argued. From the angle i saw, it didn't look like Pocock connected in any real way. O'Brien definitely did, which is why he is likely to get a ban. I don't think i have said anything controversial or unreasonable.

I cant believe i have to explain this, but whether they were being held or not (they were) is irrelevant.
What you said is unreasonable because you imply that it is ok to punch someone or knee someone on the face as long as he was holding you before you do. That is simply not true.
This is not a matter of opinion. The laws of the game are quite clear and whether you were being held is, again, irrelevant.

 

[saulan]

France HAVE NOT cited Sean O'Brien it seems. 12 Hours is up and well if there's nothing by tomorrow morning (realistically if IRFU hear nothing tonight) then he will be free.

Does the citing have to be announced to the public within 12 hours?

 

[munstermuffin]

I cant believe i have to explain this, but whether they were being held or not (they were) is irrelevant.
What you said is unreasonable because you imply that it is ok to punch someone or knee someone on the face as long as he was holding you before you do. That is simply not true.
This is not a matter of opinion. The laws of the game are quite clear and whether you were being held is, again, irrelevant.

Actually it is relevant when they consider if a player was provoked. Obviously you won't get off but it is taken in to account for punishment.

- - - Updated - - -

Does the citing have to be announced to the public within 12 hours?

The IRFU stated a midday they've yet to be informed. Which means the French hadn't done something. And the IRFU would've been notified fairly rapid especially in such a short timeline.

 

[ZeroTwo]

The phrase we are all looking for is Mitigating Circumstances I believe.

Doesn't mean you aren't guilty but may have an impact upon the punishment.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Pape stuck a finger up SOBs Arse that was why he struck. And fwiw if there's a citing it probably won't be said until near end of 36hours

Looking back at it it's actually very clear, punch to the gut in reaction to that should be fair game. Pape is a thug.

 

[barthelemy]

If there is no action being taken off the pitch on players being held back - how can they expect the players not to take action on the pitch?

Unless it is now legal to grapple with the opposition off the ball?

Stop !!! This is just getting ridiculous. In every ruck, players are being held back, you want we look at this as well ? You want we penalize this as well ?

That SOB could have been held back is 0.5% relevant compare to his reaction. You can't do justice yourself on the pitch, this is it. And if you do justice your self being really violent like SOB has been, you should take a long ban. And the minimum punishment should be to be ban for the rest of the competition.

As for SOB not maybe being cited right now, what I know for sure is that PSA was aware of what has happened and has reacted quite strongly in the media about it. Therefore, I'm pretty sure France has cited SOB but it is maybe not official for now.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Looking back at it it's actually very clear, punch to the gut in reaction to that should be fair game. Pape is a thug.

Nah, just found a reverse angle... He's gone, all Pape did was grab the ribs!!!

Edit: Although it looks like a slap more than a punch, no clenched fist or muscles... I'm going to stop speculationg and wait 24 hours!

 

[munstermuffin]

Lads the thing is Sean O'Brien wasn't held back. Pape stuck a finger up his hole and well as funny as it sounds it's crossed a line. And Seanie reacted. I love how Schmidt has been incredibly smart and has images that identify Seanie has used an open hand hit. This technically means it's not a punch and not a red card offense.

 

[MunsterMan]

I cant believe i have to explain this, but whether they were being held or not (they were) is irrelevant.
What you said is unreasonable because you imply that it is ok to punch someone or knee someone on the face as long as he was holding you before you do. That is simply not true.
This is not a matter of opinion. The laws of the game are quite clear and whether you were being held is, again, irrelevant.

I said no such thing, and even stated i expect O'Brien to get a ban. It is still relevant he was being held. If O'Brien was not being held, and lashed out, it is an act of thuggery and he should not be playing Rugby. If he is being held, it's an act of frustration and indiscipline, but much more understandable, still worthy of a ban.

Papé is far from a thug, showed a touch of class by going over and commiserating with O'Connell when he was being stretchered off.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

I said no such thing, and even stated i expect O'Brien to get a ban. It is still relevant he was being held. If O'Brien was not being held, and lashed out, it is an act of thuggery and he should not be playing Rugby. If he is being held, it's an act of frustration and indiscipline, but much more understandable, still worthy of a ban.

But the point here is whether or not he deserves a ban. In both cases he is, hence my question about the relevance.