PDA

View Full Version : Sam T cited



Pages : [1] 2

JoeyFantastic
11th-October-2010, 16:58
Just on Newstalk there.

busbi
11th-October-2010, 16:58
Just announced, hearing tomorrow night.

ListryMurphy
11th-October-2010, 17:00
was always going to happen. Ref saod spear tackle, or was it touch judge. Either way, he wasn't going to get away with it

11th-October-2010, 17:03
was dumb, unnecessary, snide (the guy had already turned
his back and offloaded), did I say dumb? And that's before
you get to the events of last week and think just how thick it
really was. Deserved to be cited.

POC Lost Tooth
11th-October-2010, 17:03
whats the damage likely to be?
Out for this weekend certainly.
Warick to 12?

JoeyFantastic
11th-October-2010, 17:05
Hearing on Wednesday in Dublin. Will presumably be
discussing it on newstalk now.

sewa
11th-October-2010, 17:06
It just gets worse and worse.

Tifa
11th-October-2010, 17:06
http://breakingnews.ie/sport/tuitupou-cited-for-dangerous-
tackle-477291.html

11/10/2010 - 19:51:05
Munster centre Sam Tuitupou has been cited for an alleged
dangerous tackle made against London Irish.

Tuitupou has been accused of committing a dangerous
tackle on London Irish scrum-half Paul Hodgson during the
first-half of the Heineken Cup match.

Welshman Ray Wilton was the citing commissioner for an
alleged infringing of Law 10.4(j) ‘Lifting a player from the
ground and dropping or driving a player into the ground’.

The IRB recommended sanctions are as follows: Low End:
three weeks; Mid Range: six weeks; Top End: 10+ weeks;
Maximum: 52 weeks.



no mention of where the hearing is to be heard, any idea
or who the panel will be?

and I agree with EO, it was completely unnecessary and
dumb

JoeyFantastic
11th-October-2010, 17:08
It just gets worse and worse.


Genuinely don't think he'll be suspended. Ref saw it and dealt
with it.

Tobyglen
11th-October-2010, 17:09
Great news! any chance these guys can be fined for being so idiotic? His mate and next door neighbour Mafi gets a 7 week ban the week before and this guy goes away and replicates him, brawn over brains certaintly for this guy.

busbi
11th-October-2010, 17:09
I'd be more sympathetic if Hodgson had the ball but that made it
look very bad. Saying that, i'm seeing a hell of alot of borderline spear
tackles not even getting blown.

Our backline needs a total rethink if he's missing.

Benny
11th-October-2010, 17:10
Deserves a ban for this. These spear tackles are such dangerous acts it needs to be eradicated from the game and this won't be done by not getting serious with the guilty parties.


Of course we'll have the usual suspects on here moaning about injustice for Munster players. Those people would be better served condemning dangerous play.

Tobyglen
11th-October-2010, 17:12
I'd be more sympathetic if Hodgson didn't have the ball but that made it

look very bad. Saying that, i'm seeing a hell of alot of borderline spear

tackles not even getting blown.



Our backline needs a total rethink if he's missing.
Not like he did anything of use last Saturday, Warwick to 12 perhaps, However 9-10-12 axis would be very weak defensively. Running out of options because of those idiots.

tickettout
11th-October-2010, 17:14
Deserved unfortunately - should be docked wages, might learn that way.

Benny
11th-October-2010, 17:16
Deserved unfortunately - should be docked wages, might learn that way.




Agreed. It is the one thing you know for sure they care about.

Bosco
11th-October-2010, 17:18
Running out of backs for the squad, we might see the days of
Leamy and Wallace in the backs back again smileys/sad.gif

sewa
11th-October-2010, 17:19
It wasn't that bad FFS. Its a contact sport

nuke
11th-October-2010, 17:19
There is no such thing as a spear tackle, and citing's should be reserved for red card offences which this clearly wasn't

glossy
11th-October-2010, 17:19
Doesn't deserve a ban. The ref dealt with on the pitch.

thomond2006
11th-October-2010, 17:20
Off topic but does anyone know if Earls is OK?


He looked to be hobbling when he came off the fieldon Saturday?


Back OT, if the matter has been seen and dealt with by the referee, does this mean the citing panel has no case against Tuitupou?

11th-October-2010, 17:23
Guys, if that had been Stringer who had turned and
offloaded and was picked up and slammed shoulder first
into the ground after he'd released you'd be spitting blood.
It was petty and bullying.

Nuke, the IRB have actively referenced the phrase spear
tackle when talking about taking tougher action, since they
make the laws that means there is such a thing as a spear
tackle when it comes to illegality and citing.

Simple fact is to do that anyway was dumb but to do it
after last week was doubly dumb and ultimately it just
looked like a big bully picking on a little guy facing the
wrong way who didn't see it coming. I doubt if that's the
image Tuitupou would like to be remembered for.

inglorious
11th-October-2010, 17:26
Was Armitage not cited for the tackle on Dougie?

JoeyFantastic
11th-October-2010, 17:27
Guys, if that had been Stringer who had
turned and
offloaded and was picked up and slammed shoulder first
into the ground after he'd released you'd be spitting blood.
It was petty and bullying.



No offence, but that's not what happened. Sam didn't slam the
player into the ground, he lifted him and dropped him from
about waist height to the ground.

NiallGK
11th-October-2010, 17:27
This is an ERC disciplinary committee he's up against not the
IRFU. He'll do time.

11th-October-2010, 17:28
Was Armitage not cited for the tackle on
Dougie?

Nah that little snide gets away with that stuff all the time. Odd
thing is he seemed a friendly enough guy after the game but
he's one person on a rugby pitch I cannot stand, he's such a
dirty little git - like the time he ran over to a ruck to punch
Trimble - Trimble of all people who was doing nothing. Just
don't like him - as you may have noticed. Just so many of
those kind of incidents with him.

overthehillprop
11th-October-2010, 17:28
Was Armitage not cited for the tackle on Dougie?

don't be silly - only Munster players get 7 weeks for high tackles.

hellovating
11th-October-2010, 17:29
Back OT, if the matter has been seen and dealt with by the referee, does this mean the citing panel has no case against Tuitupou?





no.that was the case about 3/4 years agobut not any more.

11th-October-2010, 17:31
Guys, if that
had been Stringer who had
turned and
offloaded and was picked up and slammed shoulder first
into the ground after he'd released you'd be spitting blood.
It was petty and bullying.



No offence, but that's not what happened. Sam didn't slam
the
player into the ground, he lifted him and dropped him from
about waist height to the ground.

joey he grabbed the guy from behind, lifted him up, turned
him over and dumped him him down and he landed on his
shoulder, all after the ball had gone - that's exactly what
happened. The guy got injured from it and was clearly in
distress at that point.

Sorry if people don't want to hear it but I'm not going to
defend the indefensible - it was cringemaking as he just
looking like a bully.

manofmunster
11th-October-2010, 17:31
Utterly stupid tackle - made on a guy who had his back turned and was without the ball.


Was it a yellow card offence? Deffinitely.


Does he deserve to be cited? I'm not sure. The referee had a clear view of the incident and dealt with it there and then. Had he thought it was a red card offence, he'd have given it.


Having said that, I'd have no sympathy for him if he were banned. After Mafi's stupidity last week this is the last thing we need. Fup it, I might as well tog off myself on Saturday. The way things are going, I'd have no bother getting a gamesmileys/confused.gif

busbi
11th-October-2010, 17:31
I'd be more sympathetic if Hodgson didn't have the ball
but that made it
look very bad. Saying that, i'm seeing a hell of alot of borderline spear
tackles not even getting blown.

Our backline needs a total rethink if he's missing.Not like he
did anything of use last Saturday

You're right, nothing of use at all...

dropkick
11th-October-2010, 17:34
He hit the 9 from behind, lifted him up and turned him around
in the air. All the time the player had not even possession of
the ball. It was needless and dangerous even if he didn't drive
the player into the ground. Deserves a suspension for
stupidity alone.

inglorious
11th-October-2010, 17:51
It would be hard to defend Sammy because what he did was utterly stupid.Maybe sometimes in the heat of battle we all see the red mist and do somethingstupid.I think the citing comissioner had no choice, but when citing Sammy he should also have cited Armitage.This seems unfair to me but its a bit like the weather,theres f*ck all i can do about it.

Pixie
11th-October-2010, 17:55
Its about time Amatage got a ban - he is a nasty piece of work-not liked him since his attacks on BOD england Ireland match the other seasonsmileys/sad.gif

Point
11th-October-2010, 18:04
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.

sewa
11th-October-2010, 18:14
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped him. Anyone got a link?

manofmunster
11th-October-2010, 18:20
Just wathced it there on ITV's highlights programme.


They only replayed it in slo-motion once but I'm not sure that he actively drives the guy into the ground. Careless rather than malicious.

JoeyFantastic
11th-October-2010, 18:23
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the
lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped
him. Anyone got a link?


*


*

You can see at the hour point of this link.
http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1082314

hmm, could be wrong on this one.

TippRed
11th-October-2010, 18:27
either way I think he will do time. Once you lift a player off the ground you can not drive him in to it nor can you drop him. You have a duty of care. I do not think he drove him in to the ground so he might get away with less than 7 weeks. I hope this is not a an Islanders patter here high tackles and dangerous tackles. It is all very well having the big hitters but if they continue lke this then they become a liability

busbi
11th-October-2010, 18:32
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the
lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped
him. Anyone got a link?


*


*

You can see at the hour point of this link.
http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1082314

hmm, could be wrong on this one.

I think he just about dropped him but he left it far too late. There was
no need to go as far as he did with it. He started driving him in
downward motion and when you do that you haven't much to fall
back on.

I have to say though that i am pissed off that Delon isn't cited. When
is a high tackle a citing and when is it not? The fact he has history
makes it even more infuriating.

manofmunster
11th-October-2010, 18:41
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the
lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.



I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped
him. Anyone got a link?












You can see at the hour point of this link.
http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1082314

hmm, could be wrong on this one.


I have to say though that i am pissed off that Delon isn't cited. When
is a high tackle a citing and when is it not? The fact he has history
makes it even more infuriating.


Armitage is a sneaky f*ck alright. Just the sort of annoying little $hit I lovefindingon the worng side of a rucksmileys/badgrin.gif

McCloud
11th-October-2010, 18:43
Gone for about 6 weeks I'd say. Does he have previous on this? Blood stupid needless thing to dosmileys/sad.gif

Dudz
11th-October-2010, 18:47
The ref was on the spot and had the best view that anyone can wish to have...camera views, particularly slow motion, can make an incident seem far worse than it is...and unfortunately every time you look at a tackle like that it doesn't get any better..smileys/sad.gif


But back to the point, the ref saw it clearly and dealt with it and that should be the end of the story instead of these want-to-be refs reviewing videos after a game looking to justify their existence....if it had not been picked up by the ref, like in the case of Mafi, then fair enough....but please leave the refing to the ref...

Mebawsa Ritchie
11th-October-2010, 19:00
Wasn't that bad. Wouldn't be surprised if he got a ban though.

bosh12
11th-October-2010, 19:01
Topical issue now, Scarlets had man binned for no arm tackle, Mafi
incident, several incidents in France. ERC will go to town on him

Bosco
11th-October-2010, 19:03
if anything it might make us change the way we play the
game, if Munster rugby was a woman, it would find it hard to
score with Wayne Rooney.

not having ago at Sammy, but our tactics are all over the
place

11th-October-2010, 19:06
The ref was on the spot and had the
best view that anyone can wish to have...camera views,
particularly slow motion, can make an incident seem far
worse than it is...and unfortunately every time you look at
a tackle like that it doesn't get any better..smileys/sad.gif


But back to the point, the ref saw it clearly and dealt
with it and that should be the end of the story instead of
these want-to-be refs reviewing videos after a game
looking to justify their existence....if it had not been picked
up by the ref, like in the case of Mafi, then fair
enough....but please leave the refing to the
ref...

That's not the be all and end all of citing, it's to make sure
that if something is bad enough to merit more than just an
in game sanction it gets it. So even if the ref deals with it
they're going to ban him, he did start to send him down,
didn't take any care, off the ball, from behind, how much
do you want before it's more than just 10 minutes out in
the match? It was out of order on so many fronts.

The ERC appoints officials to double check - they're not as
your wording suggests self appointed interfering busy
bodies who've stuck their nose in. They are there for
exactly this kind of incident where the ref's view in game
isn't going to be the end of it. BTW the ref didn't see it
properly and neither did the TJ as both were following play.
The TJ saw it sufficiently to call it a spear and I think he
was seriously lucky not to get a red considering the player
was genuinely injured.

Which is another thing, people assume that if it deserved a
red the ref would give it. Refs very, very rarely give reds,
no matter what for this kind of thing.

11th-October-2010, 19:09
Topical issue now, Scarlets had man binned
for no arm tackle, Mafi
incident, several incidents in France. ERC will go to town on
him

Scarlets one deserves as long a ban as Mafi, just clattered
into the guy shoulder first.

shk7619
11th-October-2010, 19:45
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped him. Anyone got a link?














http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNnxfNNS1V0


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did.

The Word Is Born
11th-October-2010, 19:48
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped him. Anyone got a link?














http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNnxfNNS1V0


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did.

I like that- "the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did". Up there with the Chewbacca Defence.

shk7619
11th-October-2010, 19:51
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped him. Anyone got a link?














http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNnxfNNS1V0


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did.




I like that- "the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did". Up there with the Chewbacca Defence.



What i'm trying to say is that he didn't turn him and drive him into the ground.

The Word Is Born
11th-October-2010, 19:55
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped him. Anyone got a link?














http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNnxfNNS1V0


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did.




I like that- "the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did". Up there with the Chewbacca Defence.



What i'm trying to say is that he didn't turn him and drive him into the ground.

He did turn him and began to drive him into the ground but he stopped part of the way through it. He then left the player fall.

Mebawsa Ritchie
11th-October-2010, 19:56
He did turn him and began to drive him into the ground but he stopped part of the way through it. He then left the player fall.


Agreed. Good post. +1.

McCloud
11th-October-2010, 19:58
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped him. Anyone got a link?














http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNnxfNNS1V0


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did.




I like that- "the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did". Up there with the Chewbacca Defence.



What i'm trying to say is that he didn't turn him and drive him into the ground.





Strange even looking at that clip the player start on his feet and end up on his shoulder / head. Full 180 degrees turn and nothing to do with Sam?

JoeyFantastic
11th-October-2010, 20:01
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the
lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped
him. Anyone got a link?


*


*





*


<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?
<br / target="_blank">v=wNnxfNNS1V0">http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=wNnxfNNS1V0</a>


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i
also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the
player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him
to fall the way he did.


I like that- "the player's momentum and centre
of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did". Up there
with the Chewbacca Defence.


What i'm trying to say is that he didn't turn him and
drive him into the ground.





Strange even looking at that clip the player start on his
feet and end up on his shoulder / head. Full 180 degrees
turn and nothing to do with Sam?

Depends, is he putting him down or driving him down when
he releases him?

nuke
11th-October-2010, 20:01
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped him. Anyone got a link?














http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNnxfNNS1V0


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did.




I like that- "the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did". Up there with the Chewbacca Defence.



What i'm trying to say is that he didn't turn him and drive him into the ground.

there's only two issues to be looked at

1) is he guilty of the offence charged ? I don't think even the most fervant of munster supporters could claim it wasn't a dangerous tackle after the ball was gone(edit:sorry) so it's going to be a yes on this one

2) should he have recieved a straight red card ? This is a tricky one and very subjective and is the only basis for a citing. I think in Sam's case alot is going to depend on the ref's report on the yellow. If the ref says a yellow is sufficient than it's hard for a committee that didn't have their pulse on the ebb and flow of the game to take it further.

On Armitage while i didn't like what he did i don't believe it wasa red card offence so it doesn't warrant a citing

Junster
11th-October-2010, 20:08
Well it was definitely late and looks worse in slow motion
than it did when I saw the match... but I don't consider this
to be anywhere as dangerous as Armitage's tackle - for
which no yellow was given!! With our luck, he'll be out for
next week just because of the angle at which the LI player
falls.

This does mean that we'll have yet again new combinations
in the backs which we could do without for this all important
match that we have to WIN! I expect Warwick and J
Murphy in the centre (i.e. smallish 10-12 channel that
Toulon will be running through at every opportunity) and
Hurley at FB but don't see who will be on the wing and
especially who will cover 15 or 12!!?? Don't like this...

BigLad
11th-October-2010, 20:13
MURPHY to centre , warwick to FB

Speedy
11th-October-2010, 20:13
I think its similar to the Quade Cooper and Jacques Fourie tackles in the summer.

They both got a yellow card and two weeks (doubled for Fourie because he had previous). I don't know what Tuitoupou's citing history is like. He has a rep for being a hard hitter, but they can hardly take that in to account unless he's been cited in the past.

Combatlogo
11th-October-2010, 20:18
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped him. Anyone got a link?














http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNnxfNNS1V0


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did.




I like that- "the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did". Up there with the Chewbacca Defence.



It all makes sense, you're a Leinster fifth columnist. You'll get a medal for this.

munster_mafia
11th-October-2010, 20:25
The more I look at it the less I see in it. The fact that Hodgson had his back turned could have meant Sam didnt know he didnt have the ball. I dont think it looks like he slammed him into the ground. Personally think he will walk on this one.

scotscor
11th-October-2010, 20:30
Dont think it was a red card, he has let him go at the end. Sure was a stupid tackle, shame though as his tackling has usually been very good up til that.

bazzyg
11th-October-2010, 20:35
The more I look at it the less I see in it. The fact that Hodgson had his back turned could have meant Sam didnt know he didnt have the ball. I dont think it looks like he slammed him into the ground. Personally think he will walk on this one.


totally agree with you,Sam didn't drive him to the ground all he did wrong was not getting him down safely once he had the player in the air.

nuke
11th-October-2010, 20:41
The more I look at it the less I see in it. The fact that Hodgson had his back turned could have meant Sam didnt know he didnt have the ball. I dont think it looks like he slammed him into the ground. Personally think he will walk on this one.


totally agree with you,Sam didn't drive him to the ground all he did wrong was not getting him down safely once he had the player in the air.

and hitting him very late

howbad
11th-October-2010, 20:54
Well lads one of our former centres got two weeks for this and it doesn't look that bad either <h1 id="watch-line-title">Jean De Villiers spear tackle on Rene Ranger (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YlcJ_1qXA0)</span></font></h1>so I don't know he could get 2 weeks

McCloud
11th-October-2010, 21:02
The more I look at it the less I see in it. The fact that Hodgson had his back turned could have meant Sam didnt know he didnt have the ball. I dont think it looks like he slammed him into the ground. Personally think he will walk on this one.


totally agree with you,Sam didn't drive him to the ground all he did wrong was not getting him down safely once he had the player in the air.




and hitting him very late



Think according to thelaws of the gamethat is a ban?

munstershane
11th-October-2010, 21:04
I think he probably will get done for careless rather than reckless or malacious actions.





A couple of weeks ban would be my best guess. I could be way off though.

McCloud
11th-October-2010, 21:08
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.

Tobyglen
11th-October-2010, 21:12
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.

Mebawsa Ritchie
11th-October-2010, 21:17
Well lads one of our former centres got two weeks for this and it doesn't look that bad either [/url]<h1 id="watch-line-title">[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YlcJ_1qXA0"]Jean De Villiers spear tackle on Rene Ranger</span></font> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YlcJ_1qXA0)</font></h1>so I don't know he could get 2 weeks




Anyone called Rene Ranger deserves a bit of pain.

Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo got gouged by Nigel Owens for having an even sillier name.

McCloud
11th-October-2010, 21:35
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.

Charco
11th-October-2010, 22:20
6 to 7 weeks would be my
guess.Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2
weeks.


He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5
to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not
get a red card in the game.

Exactly. 1, it was late, 2, it was a cheap shot, and 3, he did
turn Hodgson towards the ground, even if he didn't
complete the movement.

Let's just hope he doesn't try to emulate Mafi's strike rate
smileys/c&#111;nfused.gif

kahalui
11th-October-2010, 22:28
He only has himself to blame - it's one thing doing the lifting but he drove him to the ground with intent.


I am with Joey on this. I thought he dropped him. Anyone got a link?














http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNnxfNNS1V0


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did.




I like that- "the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did". Up there with the Chewbacca Defence.



What i'm trying to say is that he didn't turn him and drive him into the ground.

there's only two issues to be looked at

1) is he guilty of the offence charged ? I don't think even the most fervant of munster supporters could claim it wasn't a dangerous tackle after the ball was gone(edit:sorry) so it's going to be a yes on this one

2) should he have recieved a straight red card ? This is a tricky one and very subjective and is the only basis for a citing. I think in Sam's case alot is going to depend on the ref's report on the yellow. If the ref says a yellow is sufficient than it's hard for a committee that didn't have their pulse on the ebb and flow of the game to take it further.</span>

On Armitage while i didn't like what he did i don't believe it wasa red card offence so it doesn't warrant a citing


The committee can hand out a ban even if the ref doesnt see/punish the offence during play.

It was a spear tackle. V. similar to the Cooper/Fourie tackles during the tri nations. Cooper got 4 weeks, Fourie got 2. Thats the minimum ST'll be getting..

NiallGK
12th-October-2010, 00:34
Today's IT

Tuitupou cited over tackle

GAVIN CUMMISKEY Reports

SAM TUITUPOU may be joining fellow Munster centre Lifeimi Mafi on the sidelines through
suspension having been cited for upending London Irish scrumhalf Paul Hodgson in last
Saturday’s Heineken Cup match in Reading.

Tuitupou was sinbinned for the incident after 22 minutes of Munster’s 23-17 defeat at the
Madejski Stadium (they conceded six points during his absence) by referee Christophe Berdos
but match commissioner Ray Wilton (Wales) believed he has a case to hear for “lifting from
the ground and dropping or driving a player into the ground” under IRB law 10.4 (j).

Simon Thomas, also from Wales, has been appointed as the independent judicial officer for
the hearing that will take place at the ERC offices in Dublin tomorrow.

If found guilty the low end suspension is three weeks, mid-range six weeks, with the top end
between 10 and 52 weeks.

Mafi is serving seven weeks for a dangerous tackle on Gordon D’Arcy in the Magners League
defeat to Leinster on October 2nd so Munster coach Tony McGahan is potentially without two
centres for the visit of French Top 14 league leaders Toulon to Thomond Park on Saturday.

Having touched down for the try that salvaged a precious bonus point in defeat to London
Irish, the loss of Tuitupou, capped nine times by New Zealand, would leave a void at inside
centre.

The versatile Paul Warwick is an obvious candidate to return to the side at 12 rather than his
usual role at fullback, where Johne Murphy currently resides although Murphy can also play
centre.

The Kildare-born former Leicester player is proving to be the signing of the season after two
excellent recent displays.

Cork Constitution centre Tom Gleeson is another option, having been promoted to a full
contract this season.

Niall Ronan’s head laceration, which curtailed his involvement against London Irish to just 32
minutes, makes him a doubt, although David Wallace’s second-half display makes him almost
certain to return to the openside flank either way.

Alan Quinlan also comes back into contention after being dropped, while Jerry Flannery’s 40
minutes for Shannon last Friday night against Garryowen indicates the Irish hooker should be
part of the squad announced today.

Flannery last played a professional game in June, for Ireland against the Barbarians, after a
string of injuries that included a troublesome calf.

“What it came down to was that a nerve was getting pinched in my back,” Flannery told The
Limerick Leader. “That was why I kept tearing my calf. We didn’t figure this out for a while.
The feeling was this is a calf injury, it shouldn’t be dragging on this long. So that is why I got
the anti-inflammatory injections in the spine. It was helping to soothe the nerve and fix
things. It has worked so far.

“I am almost ahead of schedule hitting this game against Garryowen. Originally, I wasn’t
aiming to be back until this week. Everything has gone well so far.”

With Denis Fogarty also injured, Damien Varley is currently in possession of the number two
jersey.

“There is a lot of rugby to play,” continued Flannery. “The trick now is to try and stay fit.
There is a lot of competition everywhere for places. If you are not fit, you are not even
considered.

“Hopefully, I will be considered for selection. They may want me to play some more club
rugby or they may want me involved in the game with Toulon. That is up to the management
team.”

Three other players have cases to answer arising from incidents in last weekend’s first round
of matches: Clermont’s Canadian lock (and former sparring partner of Paul O’Conn

dannybzr
12th-October-2010, 02:48
I get the feeling that he will get around the 7 week mark like Mafi. The face that he got him in the back with no ball and still drove him into
the ground, doesn't look good at all.

Clonlad
12th-October-2010, 05:00
Lads the clip shown doesnt show the full play. Hodgeson had his
backed turned and had just popped the ball off. Sam was committed
to the tackle at that stage and was in no position to see that the ball
was gone. It was a strong tackle, I do bot think it was a spear tackle.
Did he turn Hodgeson over and drive him into the dirt...no. I think
yellow card was justified. People however are making a song and
dance about this challenge
Armitage challenge was worse he deliberately took dougies head off
and received no sanction.

sewa
12th-October-2010, 05:13
. People however are making a song and
dance about this challenge



Its all part of trying to be liked. Most of them know that tackle wasn't worth aciting

Angus Axe
12th-October-2010, 07:28
I agree, I think he was committed to the tackle and while he
did lift him, he wasnt driven or dropped to the ground.
That said, ERC may still want to set a strong example to
anything that even resembles a spear tackle and hand out a
minimum time suspension.

Can Deasy play centre - should he come into the mix if a ban
is imposed.

Balla Boy
12th-October-2010, 07:42
I don't think it was worth a citing at all. The "late" call is dubious - he deliberately turned his back to mask the fact that he was popping the ball off. Him getting hit after it went was a result of that.


I'm not convinced about the notion of it as a spear either. His feet come up, but there's no real downward force.

Ptrck
12th-October-2010, 07:43
Can Deasy play centre - should he
come into the mix if a ban
is imposed.

He plays first center for the As. But i imagine Warwick to start
at 12.

The Doc
12th-October-2010, 07:48
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNnxfNNS1V0


There's no way he drove the player into the ground, i also think he did his best not to drop him. It was the player's momentum and centre of gravity that caused him to fall the way he did.





I could be wrong but I thought that driving or dropping the player is not the issue - once you lift a player up and turn him, the obligation is on the tackler to ensure he comes down safely - you can't turn him over let go and say "Nothing to do with me Guv".


So - while I don't think this was the worst I have seen by a long way, he may be done on the low end for not bringing the player to ground safely.

bazzyg
12th-October-2010, 08:04
The more I look at it the less I see in it. The fact that Hodgson had his back turned could have meant Sam didnt know he didnt have the ball. I dont think it looks like he slammed him into the ground. Personally think he will walk on this one.


totally agree with you,Sam didn't drive him to the ground all he did wrong was not getting him down safely once he had the player in the air.




and hitting him very late



Think according to thelaws of the gamethat is a ban?





Nuke - It Wasn't a late tackle, ashehid the pass by turning his back.


Mc - Surely the yellow is sufficient for not putting him backdown.

Slaptarse
12th-October-2010, 08:19
I think any ban would beharsh. I've only seen it in slow mo and he was committed to the tackle. Hodgson turned his back to draw the tackle and get the pass away. As he hit him, I've no doubt Tuitupou thought Hodgson still had the ball. He was careless in lifting and dropping him, but you see a lot worse go unpenalised. The ref saw it and dealt with it as he saw fit.

manofmunster
12th-October-2010, 10:13
Re-watched it a few times now on that link.


I think the disciplinary panel will come to the conclusion that it is an entry level offence - he lifted the guy off his feet and didn't put him back down carefully enough - and the yellow wassufficient punishmen at the time.

Mebawsa Ritchie
12th-October-2010, 10:28
Re-watched it a few times now on that link.


I think the disciplinary panel will come to the conclusion that it is an entry level offence - he lifted the guy off his feet and didn't put him back down carefully enough - and the yellow wassufficient punishmen at the time.

Isn't asn entry level offence still a ban of 2/3 weeks?smileys/c&#111;nfused.gif

McCloud
12th-October-2010, 10:41
Re-watched it a few times now on that link.


I think the disciplinary panel will come to the conclusion that it is an entry level offence - he lifted the guy off his feet and didn't put him back down carefully enough - and the yellow wassufficient punishmen at the time.




Isn't asn entry level offence still a ban of 2/3 weeks?smileys/c&#111;nfused.gif



Under Law 10.4(j) 'Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving a player into the ground', the IRB recommended sanction on the Low End is 3 weeks; on the Mid Range is 6 weeks and on the Top End, 10+ weeks up to a maximum: 52 weeks.

Tobyglen
12th-October-2010, 10:44
Anything more than 3 weeks(entry level) would be very harsh considering he doesn't seem to have any previous.

Maybe 3 weeks for being an idiot might be a more suitable ban.

kahalui
12th-October-2010, 11:08
Re-watched it a few times now on that link.


I think the disciplinary panel will come to the conclusion that it is an entry level offence - he lifted the guy off his feet and didn't put him back down carefully enough - and the yellow wassufficient punishmen at the time.




Isn't asn entry level offence still a ban of 2/3 weeks?smileys/c&#111;nfused.gif



Under Law 10.4(j) 'Lifting a player from the ground and dropping </font>or driving a player into the ground', the IRB recommended sanction on the Low End is 3 weeks</font>; on the Mid Range is 6 weeks and on the Top End, 10+ weeks up to a maximum: 52 weeks.




The law clearly states STs tackle is a banning offence.

Clonlad
12th-October-2010, 11:10
10. Mins in bin was punishment enough. Erc should give him a slap on
wrists and send him on his merry way

nuke
12th-October-2010, 11:22
Re-watched it a few times now on that link.


I think the disciplinary panel will come to the conclusion that it is an entry level offence - he lifted the guy off his feet and didn't put him back down carefully enough - and the yellow wassufficient punishmen at the time.




Isn't asn entry level offence still a ban of 2/3 weeks?smileys/c&#111;nfused.gif



Under Law 10.4(j) 'Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving a player into the ground', the IRB recommended sanction on the Low End is 3 weeks; on the Mid Range is 6 weeks and on the Top End, 10+ weeks up to a maximum: 52 weeks.







The law clearly states STs tackle is a banning offence.





Only if it's deemed that he should have received a straight red card for the offense

Combatlogo
12th-October-2010, 11:34
Re-watched it a few times now on that link.


I think the disciplinary panel will come to the conclusion that it is an entry level offence - he lifted the guy off his feet and didn't put him back down carefully enough - and the yellow wassufficient punishmen at the time.




Isn't asn entry level offence still a ban of 2/3 weeks?smileys/c&#111;nfused.gif



Under Law 10.4(j) 'Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving a player into the ground', the IRB recommended sanction on the Low End is 3 weeks; on the Mid Range is 6 weeks and on the Top End, 10+ weeks up to a maximum: 52 weeks.







The law clearly states STs tackle is a banning offence.





The laws of the game say nothing about bans.

Speedy
12th-October-2010, 11:35
On the subject of citings, look at this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrmED1rLCRc) from Martin Williams.

Few weeks enforced holiday at least. It happens 18 seconds in, at about the same time the ball leaves Tito's hands. Knee down on top of Paterson's head.

Hugonaut
12th-October-2010, 11:39
On the subject of citings, look at this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrmED1rLCRc) from Martin Williams.

Few weeks enforced holiday at least. It happens 18 seconds in, at about the same time the ball leaves Tito's hands. Knee down on top of Paterson's head.



That should be a good long ban. Can't even knee to the head of a downed opponent in the UFC. Surprised at Williams, thought he was a cleaner player than that.

HurlerOnDeDitch
12th-October-2010, 11:40
There are a lot of red herrings on this thread.


People are pointing out that the tackle was late and from behind as if this is a punishable offence and somehow makes the tackle worse.


The fact is that Hodgeson turned his back and popped the ball away afterSammy was committed to the tackle. None of this is Tuitupo's or should be considered by the panel. In fact it may well be entered as a mitigating factor by Munster.


The only issue is whether the tackle was dangerous and, if so, what is the proper punishment.


I think the tackle was careless and fully deserved a yellow card.


I don't think it warrants further punishment but then, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets 2 weeks either.

Cowboy
12th-October-2010, 11:40
He gives him a shove a few times as well before it. Looks
deliberate and very out of character for Nugget.

kahalui
12th-October-2010, 11:42
Re-watched it a few times now on that link.


I think the disciplinary panel will come to the conclusion that it is an entry level offence - he lifted the guy off his feet and didn't put him back down carefully enough - and the yellow wassufficient punishmen at the time.




Isn't asn entry level offence still a ban of 2/3 weeks?smileys/c&#111;nfused.gif



Under Law 10.4(j) 'Lifting a player from the ground and dropping </font>or driving a player into the ground', the IRB recommended sanction on the Low End is 3 weeks</font>; on the Mid Range is 6 weeks and on the Top End, 10+ weeks up to a maximum: 52 weeks.







The law clearly states STs tackle is a banning offence.





The laws of the game say nothing about bans.

Afaik, you're a lawyer/solicitor, so no point arguing with you.

We'll find out soon enough whether he gets a ban or not.

Combatlogo
12th-October-2010, 11:44
On the subject of citings, look at this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrmED1rLCRc) from Martin Williams.

Few weeks enforced holiday at least. It happens 18 seconds in, at about the same time the ball leaves Tito's hands. Knee down on top of Paterson's head.



If he was playing for the liiigggiiinnddss, there'd be plenty on here claiming he slipped!smileys/lol.gif

Combatlogo
12th-October-2010, 11:46
Afaik, you're a lawyer/solicitor, so no point arguing with you.

We'll find out soon enough whether he gets a ban or not.



Neither. He may very well get a ban, I never said he wouldn't, I merely pointed out the laws of the game say nothing about bans as you claimed.

nuke
12th-October-2010, 12:05
Afaik, you're a lawyer/solicitor, so no point arguing with you.

We'll find out soon enough whether he gets a ban or not.



Neither. He may very well get a ban, I never said he wouldn't, I merely pointed out the laws of the game say nothing about bans as you claimed.





Never anypoint arguing with a ref smileys/wink.gif

kahalui
12th-October-2010, 12:15
Afaik, you're a lawyer/solicitor, so no point arguing with you.

We'll find out soon enough whether he gets a ban or not.



Neither. He may very well get a ban, I never said he wouldn't, I merely pointed out the laws of the game say nothing about bans as you claimed.

I was refering to McCs post re. law 10.4. and the IRBs 'typical' length of ban re. this particular offence.

Bans exist because there are laws in the game.

lahinch_lass
12th-October-2010, 14:47
There's a fair chance Sam will get deemed guilty, but the severity of tha ban depends on how the panel rate the offence and whether there are any mitigating factors.
e.g. they deem it entry level/low end which is supposed to be 3 weeks suspension, but it's also his first yellow card at ERC level (he played 10 challenge cup games for worcester) and on that basis they might be able to argue a reduction.

ustix
12th-October-2010, 14:51
Proper order he's been cited. I hope sammy learns his lesson. Someone on RTE pointed out that he needs indoctrination into the fact that that carry on isn't part of the tradition of Munster rugby.
Who was the insightful one amongst us who predicted that Sammy would be binned?

Mebawsa Ritchie
12th-October-2010, 14:55
Proper order he's been cited. I hope sammy learns his lesson. Someone on RTE pointed out that he needs indoctrination into the fact that that carry on isn't part of the tradition of Munster rugby. </span>
Who was the insightful one amongst us who predicted that Sammy would be binned?



I'm not so sure about that. Dangerous tackles are nothing new here.

ustix
12th-October-2010, 14:57
Proper order he's been cited. I hope sammy learns his lesson. Someone on RTE pointed out that he needs indoctrination into the fact that that carry on isn't part of the tradition of Munster rugby. </span>
Who was the insightful one amongst us who predicted that Sammy would be binned?



I'm not so sure about that. Dangerous tackles are nothing new here.

Let us proceed from the ideal to the particular...

TheOne
12th-October-2010, 15:37
Just wathced it there on ITV's highlights programme.


They only replayed it in slo-motion once but I'm not sure that he actively drives the guy into the ground. Careless rather than malicious.





Its on Rugby Dump.


Very bad !!!!!

Blindsider.
12th-October-2010, 15:56
If you lift a player off the ground, you are responsible for returning him safely to ground.

If you deliberately lift a player off the ground and leave him to fall dangerously, that is considered reckless play - def a YC and maybe more if it's very reckless.

If you deliberately lift a player off the ground and then drive him(downwards) into the ground, that is a deliberate act and a red card will more than likely follow.

Just watched it again - he turned him in the air a drove him downwards. (See above- - dunno about a ban. Has he previous?

Gezza
12th-October-2010, 15:56
Here it is (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpH0B6_FdAE)

bosh12
12th-October-2010, 15:57
Proper order he's been cited. I hope sammy learns his
lesson. Someone on RTE pointed out that he needs indoctrination into
the fact that that carry on isn't part of the tradition of Munster rugby.
Who was the insightful one amongst us who predicted that Sammy
would be binned?


Easy there, fair enough, he dumped a guy, arguably speared, but seem
to have forgotten
Messers Leamy, Fla, Claw, Galway, O Connell, Tipoki, Quinlan, etc etc.
let's not romance the stone too much.

ustix
12th-October-2010, 16:01
Proper order he's been cited. I hope sammy learns his

lesson. Someone on RTE pointed out that he needs indoctrination into

the fact that that carry on isn't part of the tradition of Munster rugby.

Who was the insightful one amongst us who predicted that Sammy

would be binned?





Easy there, fair enough, he dumped a guy, arguably speared, but seem

to have forgotten

Messers Leamy, Fla, Claw, Galway, O Connell, Tipoki, Quinlan, etc etc.

let's not romance the stone too much.
Scoundrels the lot of them...

TheBlueMovie
12th-October-2010, 16:01
Proper order he's been cited. I hope sammy learns his lesson. Someone on RTE pointed out that he needs indoctrination into the fact that that carry on isn't part of the tradition of Munster rugby.</span>
Who was the insightful one amongst us who predicted that Sammy would be binned?



Perhaps Hayes, Quinlan, and Flannery should also have an indoctrination?
Don't be so ridiculous, no team is above occassional dirty incidents. Tuitopo f**ked up, he knows it, no need for the munster are choir boys false propaganda.

Oh and I suppose I have to put this disclaimer in here because people on these forums are so precious about anyone outside of Munster saying anything negative about their team and the 'wum' phrase will be thrown about : As a Leinster fan I am well aware that Jennings, Heaslip, Sexton have all done similar.

howbad
12th-October-2010, 16:37
Proper order he's been cited. I hope sammy learns his lesson. Someone on RTE pointed out that he needs indoctrination into the fact that that carry on isn't part of the tradition of Munster rugby.</span>
Who was the insightful one amongst us who predicted that Sammy would be binned?



Perhaps Hayes, Quinlan, and Flannery should also have an indoctrination?
Don't be so ridiculous, no team is above occassional dirty incidents. Tuitopo f**ked up, he knows it, no need for the munster are choir boys false propaganda.

Oh and I suppose I have to put this disclaimer in here because people on these forums are so precious about anyone outside of Munster saying anything negative about their team and the 'wum' phrase will be thrown about : As a Leinster fan I am well aware that Jennings, Heaslip, Sexton have all done similar.</span>


That's nice of yousmileys/c&#111;nfused.gifsmileys/c&#111;nfused.gif

12th-October-2010, 16:40
On the subject of citings, look at
v=vrmED1rLCRc">this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
<br / target=) from Martin Williams.Few
weeks enforced holiday at least. It happens 18 seconds in,
at about the same time the ball leaves Tito's hands. Knee
down on top of Paterson's head.
That should be a good long ban. Can't even knee
to the head of a downed opponent in the UFC. Surprised at
Williams, thought he was a cleaner player than
that.

Not just the knee, he's holding the player's head down on 2
occasions and clearly when the player isn't having it he
knees him in the head. That's got to be a long ban.

12th-October-2010, 16:44
There are a lot of red
herrings on this thread.


People are pointing out that the tackle was late and from
behind as if this is a punishable offence and somehow
makes the tackle worse.


The fact is that Hodgeson turned his back and popped
the ball away after*Sammy was committed to the tackle.
None of this is Tuitupo's or should be considered by the
panel. In fact it may well be entered as a mitigating factor
by Munster.**


The only issue is whether the tackle was dangerous and,
if so, what is the proper punishment.


I think the tackle was careless and fully deserved a
yellow card.


I don't think it warrants further punishment but then, I
wouldn't be surprised if he gets 2 weeks either.


*

Problem is even if the player still had the ball taking him
over and dumping him - and to be fair he clearly does start
the downward momentum so even more than normal the
onus is on ST to control the player's descent. Yellow card
is irrelevant, he did something that's not allowed, everyone
knows it's not allowed and it could have justified a straight
red considering his actions in tipping the player over and
not controlling him caused what appeared to be an injury.
It may be lucky for him that by the time the ref got to the
incident Hodgson was recovering because if that had been
dealt with at the point the player was writhing on the deck
it might have been viewed more severely.

If he gets a 3 week ban then he deserves it even for just
the stupidity of doing that straight after Mafi's brain farts.

inglorious
12th-October-2010, 17:19
Proper order he's been cited. I hope sammy learns his lesson. Someone on RTE pointed out that he needs indoctrination into the fact that that carry on isn't part of the tradition of Munster rugby.
Who was the insightful one amongst us who predicted that Sammy would be binned?


Perhaps Hayes, Quinlan, and Flannery should also have an indoctrination?
Don't be so ridiculous, no team is above occassional dirty incidents. Tuitopo f**ked up, he knows it, no need for the munster are choir boys false propaganda.

Oh and I suppose I have to put this disclaimer in here because people on these forums are so precious about anyone outside of Munster saying anything negative about their team and the 'wum' phrase will be thrown about : As a Leinster fan I am well aware that Jennings, Heaslip, Sexton have all done similar.
You forgot Sean O Brien.

dedon
12th-October-2010, 18:01
There was a spear tackle on Sammy T by two Leinster players in the magners game. Happened near the end of first half.

Think one of them was Darcy. Everyone in the pub I was in saw it and couldn't believe it was missed.

Both players lifted him up and dropped him on his head.

As per usual Leinster get away with it as they were prob two Irish internationals

12th-October-2010, 18:03
There was a spear tackle on Sammy T by
two Leinster players in the magners game. Happened near
the end of first half. Think one of them was Darcy.
Everyone in the pub I was in saw it and couldn't believe it
was missed. Both players lifted him up and dropped him on
his head. As per usual Leinster get away with it as they
were prob two Irish internationals


thing is for all the times everyone whines about how we get
picked up and no one else does the players simply don't
cotton on that they are being watched so heavily and still
do stupid things.

ustix
12th-October-2010, 18:47
Yerra, what Sammy did was wrong

busbi
12th-October-2010, 19:12
Proper order he's been cited. I hope sammy learns his
lesson. Someone on RTE pointed out that &lt;span style="font-weight:
bold;"&gt;he needs indoctrination into the fact that that carry on isn't part
of the tradition of Munster rugby. &lt;/span&gt;Who was the insightful one
amongst us who predicted that Sammy would be binned?
I'm not so sure about that. Dangerous tackles are nothing new
here.

That was actually a terrible remark from McJerk, said in a poor tone, no
need for that crap. I'd hope Pat G was on RTEs case over it.

highfield
12th-October-2010, 19:25
I think the thing that drives me crazy about foreign coaches is the unwillingness to play Irish players.

How many games have Ryan, toasterhead, Deasy got. In leinster they have 5/6 players who have made a name for themselves in the last 2/3 years.

The Word Is Born
12th-October-2010, 19:45
I think the thing that drives me crazy about foreign coaches is the unwillingness to play Irish players.

How many games have Ryan, toasterhead, Deasy got. In leinster they have 5/6 players who have made a name for themselves in the last 2/3 years.





I didn't realise that Michael Cheika was from Tullamore.

TheBlueMovie
12th-October-2010, 19:46
You forgot Sean O Brien.

Oh yeah I forgot Sean O'Brien lifting someone by the scrum cap should be a 12 month ban smileys/lol.gif

Mebawsa Ritchie
12th-October-2010, 19:55
smileys/lol.gif I am starting to really love this place.


Trolls never last too long here mind smileys/wink.gif

Combatlogo
12th-October-2010, 19:56
I think the thing that drives me crazy about foreign coaches is the unwillingness to play Irish players.

How many games have Ryan, toasterhead, Deasy got. In leinster they have 5/6 players who have made a name for themselves in the last 2/3 years.




I didn't realise that Michael Cheika was from Tullamore.



Pure BIFFO alright.

McCloud
12th-October-2010, 20:09
Folks can we stick to the subject and stay away from x, y, z did the same or worse posts.


Thanks.

Benny
12th-October-2010, 21:34
Halstead


Ah now there was a player worth his weight in gold.


Anyway we haven't long more to wait to see how Sam fares in this hearing. I think he deserves a suspension but I'll be happy if justice isn't served on this occasion.

McCloud
12th-October-2010, 21:56
Halstead


Ah now there was a player worth his weight in gold.


Anyway we haven't long more to wait to see how Sam fares in this hearing. I think he deserves a suspension but I'll be happy if justice isn't served on this occasion.





ERC said they were very concerned about disipline on and off the pitch. Think they will be handing out notice on that this week.

kahalui
12th-October-2010, 22:41
My guess is 3/4 weeks.

In an interview ST did last week, he was asked what he thought of Mafi's tackle, he said- referees in tonga wouldve waved it 'play on'. Now thats all well and good but a professional rugby player who has experience playing in Europe shouldnt be 'encouraging' these type of tackles in an interview, or on the pitch- where he didnt take long to emulate his cousin. Both of them are experienced enough to know what they can and cannot do on the field of play.

The stupid and needless tackles couldnt have come at a worse time and they might just cost us more than we think.

Waterfordlad
12th-October-2010, 22:47
Agreed Kahalui. Not helping the team at all, we've enough injuries to cope with without losing players like that

Balla Boy
13th-October-2010, 06:24
I've deleted the Munster/Leinster bun fight. I'm sure we have plenty of those elsewhere for those that need their fix.


Let's keep this thread vaguely on topic.


If people want to discuss inconsistency in bans between provinces, that's fine. I'm not sure that Munster's production of backs is relevant.


Thanks.

Tifa
13th-October-2010, 06:48
any idea what time the commission is meeting in Dublin today
or indeed what time we will have a decision

Dave Cahill
13th-October-2010, 08:24
There are so many factors to take into account in an
incident like this.

Was the play dangerous. I think we'd all agree it was, not
massively, perhaps careless would be a better word

Was it a malicious tackle, was there malice of forethought?
Nope

Did he drive the player into the ground? Nope.

Was he negligent in ensuring the player was returned to
the ground safely. Yes

Was it a red card offense? I don't think it was.

Does the tackler have a record of careless play? I don't
know, lets assume not.

Is this type of tackle a 'hot button' issue with the IRB. It is
currently, which is a major problem for Sam, more than
the tackle itself.

I'd say low end entry point (fnar), which I think someone
has said is three weeks? Again assuming a good prior
record, and the above, and in what mood the panel are in
and how the case is presented to them, I can't see him
getting more than a fortnight at worst, and it could well be
suspended for a period of time, say two months (to cover
the december double header)

RobbieG
13th-October-2010, 09:12
any idea what time the commission is meeting in Dublin today

or indeed what time we will have a decision

Usually released around 6pm

rathbaner
13th-October-2010, 10:00
There are so many factors to take into account in an

incident like this.



Was the play dangerous. I think we'd all agree it was, not

massively, perhaps careless would be a better word



Was it a malicious tackle, was there malice of forethought?

Nope



Did he drive the player into the ground? Nope.



Was he negligent in ensuring the player was returned to

the ground safely. Yes



Was it a red card offense? I don't think it was.



Does the tackler have a record of careless play? I don't

know, lets assume not.



Is this type of tackle a 'hot button' issue with the IRB. It is

currently, which is a major problem for Sam, more than

the tackle itself.



I'd say low end entry point (fnar), which I think someone

has said is three weeks? Again assuming a good prior

record, and the above, and in what mood the panel are in

and how the case is presented to them, I can't see him

getting more than a fortnight at worst, and it could well be

suspended for a period of time, say two months (to cover

the december double header)
He's a Pacific Islander. The blazers will add a few weeks for that. If you're right, I'd be genuinely, and pleasantly, surprised

manofmunster
13th-October-2010, 10:04
There are so many factors to take into account in an
incident like this.

Was the play dangerous. I think we'd all agree it was, not
massively, perhaps careless would be a better word

Was it a malicious tackle, was there malice of forethought?
Nope

Did he drive the player into the ground? Nope.

Was he negligent in ensuring the player was returned to
the ground safely. Yes

Was it a red card offense? I don't think it was.

Does the tackler have a record of careless play? I don't
know, lets assume not.

Is this type of tackle a 'hot button' issue with the IRB. It is
currently, which is a major problem for Sam, more than
the tackle itself.

I'd say low end entry point (fnar), which I think someone
has said is three weeks? Again assuming a good prior
record, and the above, and in what mood the panel are in
and how the case is presented to them, I can't see him
getting more than a fortnight at worst, and it could well be
suspended for a period of time, say two months (to cover
the december double header)


I'd agree with all of that.

lawrence
13th-October-2010, 10:11
am i the only one that does not see him as a big loss?

its not like he has done f**k all this season so far, he got a try the other night that lets be fair reggie corrigan would have finished....

Him being on the pitch or the sideline is hardly the winning or losing of this game saturday.

lawrence
13th-October-2010, 10:12
...
Does the tackler have a record of careless play? I don't

know, lets assume not.



seemingly he does from his rugby league playing days, which may not count..

busbi
13th-October-2010, 10:20
am i the only one that does not see him as a big loss?

its not like he has done f**k all this season so far, he got a try the other night that lets be fair reggie corrigan would have finished....

Him being on the pitch or the sideline is hardly the winning or losing of this game saturday.



I reckon you could be seriously under estimating his importance. Certainly in a defensive sense, while problems at half back are limiting the capabilities off all our outside backs in attack.


People are painting him as a crash ball merchant but the man has a beautiful pair of hands and a lovely swift pass.

joeglum
13th-October-2010, 10:48
am i the only one that does not see him as a big loss?

its not like he has done f**k all this season so far, he got a try the other night that lets be fair reggie corrigan would have finished....

Him being on the pitch or the sideline is hardly the winning or losing of this game saturday.



I reckon you could be seriously under estimating his importance. Certainly in a defensive sense, while problems at half back are limiting the capabilities off all our outside backs in attack.


People are painting him as a crash ball merchant but the man has a beautiful pair of hands and a lovely swift pass.

Spot on Busbi, he would be a big loss.

Balla Boy
13th-October-2010, 10:52
I don't see how he's supposed to do anything other than crash what he's getting at the moment.


We're all agreed (whether we blame the phase game or the non-breaking half backs) that Munster aren't doing enough to stop the midfield from packing with defenders.


The sight of a 12 taking contact shouldn't be surprising in that situation.


He made just about our only line break of the game against Leinster, and I'd expect more of the same if we can get things to click properly.

Ballyb
13th-October-2010, 11:08
am i the only one that does not see him as a big loss?

its not like he has done f**k all this season so far, he got a try the other night that lets be fair reggie corrigan would have finished....

Him being on the pitch or the sideline is hardly the winning or losing of this game saturday.



In the current climate with so many backs, B Murphy, Mafi, Dowling, and Jones unavailable, Sam is very much needed. As T McGahan said yesterday, the only back left, from the panel of players submitted to the HEC organisers, is Danny Barns. No dis-respect to Danny, he's a fine player for the futurebut he does not yet have the experience for thid level. (If he is used this weekend, I will be absolutely delighted if he proves me wrong)

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 11:17
I don't see how he's supposed to do anything other than crash what he's getting at the moment.


We're all agreed (whether we blame the phase game or the non-breaking half backs) that Munster aren't doing enough to stop the midfield from packing with defenders.


The sight of a 12 taking contact shouldn't be surprising in that situation.


He made just about our only line break of the game against Leinster, and I'd expect more of the same if we can get things to click properly.

The man do speak the truth. Spot on! smileys/thumb-up.gif

p.s. To make the situation worse our half backs offer a limited ability to make a break, which means the resetting defence can fan out from 12 and outwards.

RobbieG
13th-October-2010, 11:22
I don't see how he's supposed to do anything other than crash what he's getting at the moment.


We're all agreed (whether we blame the phase game or the non-breaking half backs) that Munster aren't doing enough to stop the midfield from packing with defenders.


The sight of a 12 taking contact shouldn't be surprising in that situation.


He made just about our only line break of the game against Leinster, and I'd expect more of the same if we can get things to click properly.

The man do speak the truth. Spot on! smileys/thumb-up.gif

p.s. To make the situation worse our half backs offer a limited ability to make a break, which means the resetting defence can fan out from 12 and outwards.


Story of the game against LI until Duncan Williams came on

GMCAD
13th-October-2010, 11:37
<H1 style="MARGIN: auto 0cm 7.5pt; BACKGROUND: white">Not sure of Tuitupou recent record but some years back a couple of suspensions - 2005 Lions Tour - Auckland centre Sam Tuitupou has been suspended from all rugby for six weeks after being found guilty of stomping on a British and Irish Lions player in Tuesday's tour match. An International Rugby Board judicial officer determined on Wednesday that the former All Black was guilty of trampling on his Lions opposite Gordon D'Arcy in Auckland's 17-13 loss.Earlier this year Tuitupou was suspended from Super 12 play for two weeks after stomping on Canterbury Crusader and All Black flanker Richie McCaw during a match in March. Tuitupou also punched Lions lock Ben Kay during Tuesday's match, but was not cited for that incident. The Lions were penalised for the punch Kay threw in the same fracas.<xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comsmileys/surprised.giffficesmileys/surprised.gifffice" /><osmileys/razz.gif></osmileys/razz.gif></H1>

munsterbouy
13th-October-2010, 11:43
He got 3 weeks ...not too bad

glorob
13th-October-2010, 11:43
http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/8089.php

JoeyFantastic
13th-October-2010, 11:44
He got 3 weeks ...not too bad


Bad enough, whatever about Mafi getting a deserved ban, this
one is nonsense.

flatpass
13th-October-2010, 11:44
He got three weeks.

munsterbouy
13th-October-2010, 11:48
He got 3 weeks ...not too bad





Bad enough, whatever about Mafi getting a deserved ban, this

one is nonsense.


To each their own, considering the consistencies/ inconsistencies in regards to bans these days it could have been worse.

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 11:50
Leaves us nicely in le merde for Saturday.

For the first time in over a decade I think we may struggle to get out of the group.

busbi
13th-October-2010, 11:52
Ridiculous the more i think about it. There are tackles being let go in every game, while this one got dealt with there and then.

manofmunster
13th-October-2010, 11:53
A bit harsh. We're scraping the bottom of the barrel now for centres on Saturday.


I'd go with Deasy at 12- throw him in from the start and lets see what he's capable of. What's the worst that could happen... He has a 'mare and we pull him off at half time? murphy back to the wing and Warwick at FB.

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 11:54
He got 3 weeks ...not too bad


Bad enough, whatever about Mafi getting a deserved ban, this
one is nonsense.


To each their own, considering the consistencies/ inconsistencies in regards to bans these days it could have been worse.



He didn't control the players decent to the ground. This being an ERC citting committee he was always going to get a ban.

munsterbouy
13th-October-2010, 11:54
To be honest mafi's disciplinary record concerns me a lot more than this ban,he should have been taken in hand a long time ago, he is a one man penalty machine.

sewa
13th-October-2010, 11:56
We are not going to miss a guy with 9 caps for theAll Blacks. People can actually post this and we are supposed to take it seriously smileys/lol.gif


P.s. we are in serious merde

glorob
13th-October-2010, 11:58
We are not going to miss a guy with 9 caps for theAll Blacks. People can actually post this and we are supposed to take it seriously smileys/lol.gif


P.s. we are in serious merde





Would you take anything posted on this site seriously?

Old Dog
13th-October-2010, 11:59
Ye can slag her off all ye like, but it looks like my missus was spot on, 6 months ago! LINK (http://www.munsterfans.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25562&amp;KW=Tuitupo&amp;PN=0&amp;TPN=2)







It's incredible really.

A signing is announced, and before the poor fella has even seen the ink dry on his contract, never mind had the opportunity actually don a red jersey, the knockers are out on force http://www.munsterfans.com/forum/smileys/sad.gif The Cognoscenti seemingly know every nuance of his playing style and ability, despite not actually having seen him play.

The quality of comment on here is from the basement level of knowledge, intelligence, and particularly cop on - little wonder MR are in frequent contact with Oz giving out.




He's a fine player, MR - he's Munster'slatest bish bash bosh take it up / recycle it recruit who will cover the ROG channel and will give away regular penalties for high hits - in 50-odd games for Worcester he managed a mere4 yellow cards - which will help to keep ye on top of the Specsavers Dirty TeamLeague next season. (I know that winning the dirty play league means a lot to many of ye.)


He was suspended for a week in 2005 for trampling on Richie 'Cheat' McCaw in a Super 14 game - which is definitely a point in his favour. http://www.munsterfans.com/forum/smileys/biggrin.gif





smileys/razz.gif

Aussiedub
13th-October-2010, 12:02
We are not going to miss a guy with 9 caps for theAll Blacks. People can actually post this and we are supposed to take it seriously smileys/lol.gif


P.s. we are in serious merde





Don't tell me you're getting worried smileys/wink.gif

RobbieG
13th-October-2010, 12:03
3 weekssmileys/sad.gif

Tifa
13th-October-2010, 12:03
maybe we are really standing in that red sludge, the walls are
breeched

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 12:04
We are not going to miss a guy with 9 caps for theAll Blacks. People can actually post this and we are supposed to take it seriously smileys/lol.gif


P.s. we are in serious merde





Would you take anything posted on this site seriously?

Very little of it.

What seems to be happening is somebody (could be anybody) voices an opinion. Someone else agrees. It then grows legs, and get accepted by the masses.

shk7619
13th-October-2010, 12:20
3 weeks, low end ban. Was the fact that he recieved a yellow not considered?

ciaranb
13th-October-2010, 12:22
We are not going to miss a guy with 9 caps for theAll Blacks. People can actually post this and we are supposed to take it seriously smileys/lol.gif


P.s. we are in serious merde





Would you take anything posted on this site seriously?




Very little of it.

What seems to be happening is somebody (could be anybody) voices an opinion. Someone else agrees. It then grows legs, and get accepted by the masses.



I agree and accept what you are saying!

shk7619
13th-October-2010, 12:22
Jamie Cudmore has got a 10 week ban, ruling him out of both Leinster games.

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 12:25
3 weeks, low end ban. Was the fact that he recieved a yellow not considered?


That will not be known until the ERC publish the committee's report. But I'd assume that they decided the yellow card was not sufficient sanction.

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 12:25
We are not going to miss a guy with 9 caps for theAll Blacks. People can actually post this and we are supposed to take it seriously smileys/lol.gif


P.s. we are in serious merde





Would you take anything posted on this site seriously?




Very little of it.

What seems to be happening is somebody (could be anybody) voices an opinion. Someone else agrees. It then grows legs, and get accepted by the masses.



I agree and accept what you are saying!

smileys/biggrin.gifsmileys/biggrin.gif Witty smileys/cool.gifsmileys/cool.gif

Aussiedub
13th-October-2010, 12:26
QUOTE=shk7619]Jamie Cudmore has got a 10 week ban, ruling him out of both Leinster games.[/QUOTE]





smileys/biggrin.gifsmileys/biggrin.gif

ciaranb
13th-October-2010, 12:28
smileys/wink.gif







We are not going to miss a guy with 9 caps for theAll Blacks. People can actually post this and we are supposed to take it seriously smileys/lol.gif


P.s. we are in serious merde





Would you take anything posted on this site seriously?




Very little of it.

What seems to be happening is somebody (could be anybody) voices an opinion. Someone else agrees. It then grows legs, and get accepted by the masses.



I agree and accept what you are saying!




smileys/biggrin.gifsmileys/biggrin.gif Witty smileys/cool.gifsmileys/cool.gif



smileys/lol.gifThanks!!

Angus Axe
13th-October-2010, 12:29
OK, that's a bollix, but we know where we stand now. Should
be a good debate to see who'll slot in with Earls (if he's fit).
Maybe we should stick Mushy out there with a sign "They shall
not pass"smileys/biggrin.gif

munsterbouy
13th-October-2010, 12:30
QUOTE=shk7619]Jamie Cudmore has got a 10 week ban, ruling him out of both Leinster games.





smileys/biggrin.gifsmileys/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]

How much rugby does he actually play in a season?? he is always getting banned, could'nt happen to a nicer fella!!!smileys/lol.gif

Tobyglen
13th-October-2010, 12:44
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.
Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.

fogerty
13th-October-2010, 12:49
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.
Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.


Sammy got 3 weeks? Is that official?

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 12:58
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.



Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.



Entry level is 3 weeks once they decided he had acase to answer under Law 10.4 (j) then he was always going toget that as a minimum.


I wouldn't bet against you. I'm sure we will see more and some will be punished and others not. That will be down to the citing official reviewing each game. In some way's it strange that the committee that decides the punishment is madeup of 3 people but the decision to cite is made by one person. After all in Tuitupou's case if the citing official had decided a yellow card was the appropriate sanction nothing more would have been heard about it.....

Tobyglen
13th-October-2010, 12:58
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.
Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.


Sammy got 3 weeks? Is that official?

http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/8089.php

djfitz08
13th-October-2010, 12:59
Its on munsterugby.ie that timmy2pockets got 3 wks, may appeal once they get the report

fogerty
13th-October-2010, 13:06
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.
Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.


Sammy got 3 weeks? Is that official?

http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/8089.php


Awful news. If Earls is out too I cant see us winning. Too many players missing.

Speedy
13th-October-2010, 13:10
QUOTE=shk7619]Jamie Cudmore
has got a 10 week ban, ruling him out of both Leinster
games.


*


smileys/biggrin.gifsmileys/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]

Bad news for Leinster. They're going to have to play 15
men for the full 80 now that Cudmore won't be there to get
binned.

There's a clip of him getting binned for a punch on
rugbydump.com. I think the stamp was on Jacques Burger
about 22 seconds in. You can just see the leg move up and
down. Andy Saull (very good flanker) wasn't impressed. I
presume the ERC were privy to some better camera
angles.

He's on first name terms with the entire Disciplinary Panel
at this stage.

claw marked
13th-October-2010, 13:18
Does any one know if we appeal the ban could sammy play on saturday? Or has that loop been closed?

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 13:29
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.



Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.


Sammy got 3 weeks? Is that official?

http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/8089.php


Awful news. If Earls is out too I cant see us winning. Too many players missing.



According to this article (http://limerickrugby.ie/news-1137/Shaun-Payne-welcomes-Jerry-Flannery-s-return) Earls came through the game last weekend with no problems. Not sure were all this talk about him not being fit is coming from.

handslikefeet
13th-October-2010, 13:31
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.



Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.


Sammy got 3 weeks? Is that official?

http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/8089.php


Awful news. If Earls is out too I cant see us winning. Too many players missing.



According to this article (http://limerickrugby.ie/news-1137/Shaun-Payne-welcomes-Jerry-Flannery-s-return) Earls came through the game last weekend with no problems. Not sure were all this talk about him not being fit is coming from.





Because now that Sammy's suspension is fact, we need some idle speculation to keep the nonsense flowing around here...

fogerty
13th-October-2010, 13:35
Great news if he's fit.

manofmunster
13th-October-2010, 13:43
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.



Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.


Sammy got 3 weeks? Is that official?

http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/8089.php


Awful news. If Earls is out too I cant see us winning. Too many players missing.



According to this article (http://limerickrugby.ie/news-1137/Shaun-Payne-welcomes-Jerry-Flannery-s-return) Earls came through the game last weekend with no problems. Not sure were all this talk about him not being fit is coming from.





Because now that Sammy's suspension is fact, we need some idle speculation to keep the nonsense flowing around here... I heard earls broke hisankle after the game. Slipped up on a banana skin in the dressing room. No news as yet as to the identity of the banana skin dropee but my money's on fisher smileys/mad.gif

dedon
13th-October-2010, 13:44
Shocking decision yet again by the ERC. Do you think Darcy would have gotten a ban if it was the other way around?

I doubt it

Junster
13th-October-2010, 13:46
Any injuries now and we're in serious trouble! I recall seeing
Earls limp off - hope I was dreaming or that he is now fully
recovered!?

I expect a vicious game as Toulon are fully aware of how thin
our cover is smileys/sad.gif

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 13:47
Shocking decision yet again by the ERC. Do you think Darcy would have gotten a ban if it was the other way around?

I doubt it



Actually I do think if it had been D' Arcy he would have got the 3 weeks as well. This is the ERC citting committee not an IRFU citing committee.

Junster
13th-October-2010, 13:48
I expect Wallace or Leamy to be training as cover for the
centres smileys/wink.gif

Huwie
13th-October-2010, 13:54
On the subject of citings, look at this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrmED1rLCRc) from Martin Williams.

Few weeks enforced holiday at least. It happens 18 seconds in, at about the same time the ball leaves Tito's hands. Knee down on top of Paterson's head.



2 weeks for Martyn (http://www.cardiffblues.com/news/4684.php)

Hugonaut
13th-October-2010, 13:55
On the subject of citings, look at this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrmED1rLCRc) from Martin Williams.

Few weeks enforced holiday at least. It happens 18 seconds in, at about the same time the ball leaves Tito's hands. Knee down on top of Paterson's head.



2 weeks for Martyn (http://www.cardiffblues.com/news/4684.php)




Lenient.

fogerty
13th-October-2010, 13:58
Any injuries now and we're in serious trouble! I recall seeing

Earls limp off - hope I was dreaming or that he is now fully

recovered!?



I expect a vicious game as Toulon are fully aware of how thin

our cover is smileys/sad.gif

He limped off alright, and had a strapping over his left thigh/hamstring this week.

And look who's also around the corner, only Samoa, South Africa, Argentina and NZ.smileys/sad.gif Injuries guarenteed.

Huwie
13th-October-2010, 14:00
On the subject of citings, look at this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrmED1rLCRc) from Martin Williams.

Few weeks enforced holiday at least. It happens 18 seconds in, at about the same time the ball leaves Tito's hands. Knee down on top of Paterson's head.



2 weeks for Martyn (http://www.cardiffblues.com/news/4684.php)




Lenient.


Its the lowest Ban for the type of incident as indicated below.

Law 10.4(a) 'A player must not strike an opponent with the knee(s)'.

IRB recommended sanction - Low End: 3 weeks; Mid Range: 8 weeks: Top End: 12+ weeks; Maximum: 52 weeks

Speedy
13th-October-2010, 14:01
On the subject of citings, look at
v=vrmED1rLCRc">this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
<br / target=) from Martin Williams.Few
weeks enforced holiday at least. It happens 18 seconds in,
at about the same time the ball leaves Tito's hands. Knee
down on top of Paterson's head.
p">2 weeks for Martyn (http://www.cardiffblues.com/news/4684.ph
<br / target=)Lenient.

Surely theres meant to be a 1 before the 2?

I've no idea how Sammy's tackle was deemed to be worse
than deliberately kneeing another player in the face when
he was on the ground.

rathbaner
13th-October-2010, 14:08
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.
Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.



He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.



Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.


Sammy got 3 weeks? Is that official?

http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/8089.php


Awful news. If Earls is out too I cant see us winning. Too many players missing.



According to this article (http://limerickrugby.ie/news-1137/Shaun-Payne-welcomes-Jerry-Flannery-s-return) Earls came through the game last weekend with no problems. Not sure were all this talk about him not being fit is coming from.
From munsterrugby.ie at TP yesterday
http://www.munsterfans.com//uploads/images/rathbaner/7AA_inpho_00464157.jpg

skinnyryan
13th-October-2010, 14:36
6 to 7 weeks would be my guess.Nothing too crazy, I think he'll get 2 weeks.


He dumped a player with out the ball in players hands. 5 to 7 weeks and he should consider himself lucky he did not get a red card in the game.


Got 3 weeks in the end which is harsh, betcha we'll see a few of the same challenges in the next month go unpunished.Sammy got 3 weeks? Is that official?http://www.munsterrugby.ie/news/8089.phpAwful news. If Earls is out too I cant see us winning. Too many players missing.


According to this article (http://limerickrugby.ie/news-1137/Shaun-Payne-welcomes-Jerry-Flannery-s-return) Earls came through the game last weekend with no problems. Not sure were all this talk about him not being fit is coming from.From munsterrugby.ie at TP yesterdayhttp://www.munsterfans.com//uploads/images/rathbaner/7AA_inpho_00464157.jpg


Looks like he is raring to go. smileys/neutral.gif

dessiestyres
13th-October-2010, 14:38
3 weeks for Sam

Tifa
13th-October-2010, 14:38
here's the link to the erc site, 3 weeks = lower end ban

http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/news/12827.php

The citing complaint was for a dangerous tackle in
contravention of Law 10.4(j) (which is specifically
concerned with lifting a player and dropping or driving him
into the ground). In particular, Mr Tuitupou was alleged to
have committed a dangerous tackle of that type on London
Irish scrum half Paul Hodgson (No 9).

Mr Tuitupou pleaded not guilty to the citing complaint. After
considering the evidence and hearing submissions on
behalf of Mr Tuitupou and from Roger O'Connor, ERC's
Disciplinary Officer, the independent judicial officer, Simon
Thomas (Wales), determined that Mr Tuitupou had
committed the act of foul play and imposed a suspension of
three (3) weeks. Mr Tuitupou will be free to play again on 1
November, 2010.

Under the Disciplinary Rules for the 2010/11 Heineken Cup,
independent judicial officers are required to follow the
sanctioning regime laid down by the International Rugby
Board. Accordingly, having found that Mr Tuitupou had
committed an act of foul play, the independent judicial
officer was required to determine the 'entry point' for Mr
Tuitupou's suspension, based on an assessment of the
seriousness of his actions.

The possible 'entry points' for an infringement of Law
10.4(j) are lower end: three (3) weeks; mid-range: six (6)
weeks; and top end: 10 weeks or more. Having determined
the appropriate 'entry point', the independent judicial
officer was then required to consider whether that 'entry
point' should be varied to take into account any mitigating
factors (such as the player's conduct, remorse and plea)
and any aggravating factors (such as his previous record
and any need for deterrence).

In this case, the independent judicial officer determined
that the appropriate 'entry point' was lower end, ie three
(3) weeks based on (among other things) Mr Tuitupou's
recklessness and the injuries sustained by Mr Hodgson. The
independent judicial officer increased the suspension from
the entry point by one (1) week to take into account the
need for a deterrent to combat this type of offending, and
then balanced this by decreasing the suspension by one (1)
week to take into account Mr Tuitupou's conduct at the
hearing, which resulted in the final suspension of three (3)
weeks.

The independent judicial officer ordered Mr Tuitupou to pay
costs.

Bitter As A Lemon
13th-October-2010, 15:08
Whatever about Sam T's ban, Martyn Williams' 2 weeks is an absolute disgrace....FFS 2 weeks for holding a player down and kneeing him in the face.....some messege to send out.

2nd58
13th-October-2010, 15:17
Whatever about Sam T's ban, Martyn Williams' 2 weeks is an absolute disgrace....FFS 2 weeks for holding a player down and kneeing him in the face.....some messege to send out.


Totally agree. Williamsincident (nice guy and all that) is significantly worse that Sam T's tackle. I fear we are being targetted. Is it a racist thing I ask?

Combatlogo
13th-October-2010, 15:23
Whatever about Sam T's ban, Martyn Williams' 2 weeks is an absolute disgrace....FFS 2 weeks for holding a player down and kneeing him in the face.....some messege to send out.


Totally agree. Williamsincident (nice guy and all that) is significantly worse that Sam T's tackle. I fear we are being targetted. Is it a racist thing I ask?





smileys/lol.gif

2nd58
13th-October-2010, 15:25
Whatever about Sam T's ban, Martyn Williams' 2 weeks is an absolute disgrace....FFS 2 weeks for holding a player down and kneeing him in the face.....some messege to send out.


Totally agree. Williamsincident (nice guy and all that) is significantly worse that Sam T's tackle. I fear we are being targetted. Is it a racist thing I ask?





smileys/lol.gif


And your point is.....

Bitter As A Lemon
13th-October-2010, 15:34
I think he doubts the racists issue.....so do I, I must say.

Bosco
13th-October-2010, 15:35
If it was racist, Williams would have got longer smileys/lol.gif

13th-October-2010, 15:44
He got 3
weeks ...not too bad Bad enough, whatever
about Mafi getting a deserved ban, this one is nonsense.
To each their own, considering the consistencies/
inconsistencies in regards to bans these days it could have
been worse.


He didn't control the players decent to the ground. This
being an ERC citting committee he was always going to get
a ban.

Spot on, he had the choice to stop at the hit rather than
lifting the guy arse over tip and dropping him (at the least
considering he definitely to me seemed to help him on his
way), and he chose to do it. Coming after the quote that
Kahlui put up he's only got himself to blame for this and
should be grateful he only got 3 weeks - the fact that doing
this on the islands is acceptable is irrelevant, the behaviour
of the likes of Freddie Tuillagi (who I don't think I ever saw
make a legal tackle) has long shown that what they think is
acceptable "tackling" should be dealt with. If this is what's
being allowed as normal practice then someone from the
IRB needs to be cutting this behaviour off at source, rather
than just waiting for them to injure someone because they
think it's ok regardless of what the current law makers say.

3 weeks was lighter than it could have been, hopefully
someone in the management will now say to everyone let
the last 2 weeks be a lesson on what you can't go doing.

Thomond78
13th-October-2010, 15:51
So, Martyn Williams makes substantial contact with
Patterson's eye area, three times, with force, pushing down
his head to line him up to knee-drop him into the face.

And gets two weeks for it.

Jamie Cudmore stamps a guy in the face, cutting his
mouth.

And gets nine weeks, with one week added for not having a
clean record, nothing added for deterrence and nothing
added for fighting it, a week after Gavin Quinnell lost an
eye.

But Tuitoupou, with a clean record, gets three weeks, with
one week off for his conduct but with a week added for
deterrence.

So, good news, everyone; knee-dropping a defenceless
guy into the face is a lot more acceptable than mis-timing a
tackle.

Stamping a guy in the face and cutting his face is only
marginally worse than going high in a tackle.

Let's drop the pretence. This is bulls**t. We are being rid
here. And it's interesting to note that, in the same week
this happens, all the previous decisions on the ERC website
showing how they've just chucked their own rulebook out
the window have suddenly vanished.

13th-October-2010, 15:53
On the subject of citings, look at
v=vrmED1rLCRc">this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
<br / target=) from Martin Williams.Few
weeks enforced holiday at least. It happens 18 seconds in,
at about the same time the ball leaves Tito's hands. Knee
down on top of Paterson's head.
p">2 weeks for Martyn (http://www.cardiffblues.com/news/4684.ph
<br / target=)

Now that is a total bo***cks, pushes the guy's head down
(which is just petty in that situation), pushes it down
another time, guy doesn't do whatever it is the ginger
wants him to do so he just knee drops him. That's a
pathetic ban.

TheBlueMovie
13th-October-2010, 15:54
So, Martyn Williams makes substantial contact with
Patterson's eye area, three times, with force, pushing down
his head to line him up to knee-drop him into the face.

And gets two weeks for it.

Jamie Cudmore stamps a guy in the face, cutting his
mouth.

And gets nine weeks, with one week added for not having a
clean record, nothing added for deterrence and nothing
added for fighting it, a week after Gavin Quinnell lost an
eye.

But Tuitoupou, with a clean record, gets three weeks, with
one week off for his conduct but with a week added for
deterrence.

So, good news, everyone; knee-dropping a defenceless
guy into the face is a lot more acceptable than mis-timing a
tackle.

Stamping a guy in the face and cutting his face is only
marginally worse than going high in a tackle.

Let's drop the pretence. This is bulls**t. We are being rid
here. And it's interesting to note that, in the same week
this happens, all the previous decisions on the ERC website
showing how they've just chucked their own rulebook out
the window have suddenly vanished. ]


Munster-related conspiracies again?


It wasn't a mis-timed tackle. It was a mis-timed SPEAR, I think thats quite a bit worse than a mis-timed tackle. I thought 3 weeks was apt.

Thomond78
13th-October-2010, 15:57
For the benefit of the poor man's WUM, there is no such thing
as a dangerous spear. It's a term from League. In the Laws of
Rugby, there's only a dangerous tackle.

Thomond78
13th-October-2010, 16:01
Oh, and here's one; the Scarlets guy got three weeks for a
mid-range (not lower end) tackle. Nothing added for
deterrence for the more dangerous tackle. A week added for
deterrence of the less dangerous one.

We're being rid.

The Outlaw
13th-October-2010, 16:04
He got away lightly in my view.

13th-October-2010, 16:06
Whilst they were different types of dangerous play the
Scarlets one was as bad as the guy just basically shoulder
charged the carrier. If Tuitoupu got an extra week as
deterence would it be for acting as though there was nothing
wrong with it? I mean you don't want to really go around
acting like you think it's ok to do it cos then they are going to
think you don't get that you can't.

Red_langer1977
13th-October-2010, 16:13
Whatever about Sam T's ban, Martyn Williams' 2 weeks is an absolute disgrace....FFS 2 weeks for holding a player down and kneeing him in the face.....some messege to send out.


Totally agree. Williamsincident (nice guy and all that) is significantly worse that Sam T's tackle. I fear we are being targetted. Is it a racist thing I ask?





smileys/lol.gif





It definitley is a Racist thing, picking on us Irish smileys/wink.gif

Pixie
13th-October-2010, 16:15
Willims pleaded guilty, Tuitoupou pleaded not guilty

Thomond78
13th-October-2010, 16:20
This gets better and better.

Cudmore got yellow-carded for punching a guy, in the
same incident he stamped on Burger's face, cutting
Burger's mouth. He's got one of the worst records around,
and denied it. Top-level - 10 weeks.

Johnny F the Turk - mid-level - but gets three weeks off for
doing the same as Tuitoupou at the hearing, nothing added
for deterrence. Three weeks.

Tuitoupou - entry level. Only one week off for the same as
Johnny F the Turk, but gets a week added because, you
know, we can't have less dangerous tackles, so we've got
to deter them while not bothering about deterring the more
dangerous ones. Three weeks.

Williams - intended to do knee-drop him Patterson into the
face, and Patterson was in a vulnerable position. So it's
entry level, and not even that, because we'll take a week
off. TWO WEEKS.

I'd show you how this stinks, with the links, but I can't.
Because all the previous decisions, that used be up on the
ERC website, have vanished.

Thomond78
13th-October-2010, 16:25
Willims pleaded guilty, Tuitoupou pleaded not
guilty

No, Williams did not. He said it happened, but that it wasn't a
red card offence (because, y'know, knee-dropping a guy into
the face after three goes to his face to push his head to where
it can be knee-dropped just isn't a red card offence). And
Williams didn't get credit for that, btw.

shk7619
13th-October-2010, 16:35
Sam Tuitupou decision:


In this case, the independent judicial officer determined that the appropriate 'entry point' was lower end, ie three (3) weeks based on (among other things) Mr Tuitupou's recklessness and the injuries sustained by Mr Hodgson. The independent judicial officer increased the suspension from the entry point by one (1) week to take into account the need for a deterrent to combat this type of offending, and then balanced this by decreasing the suspension by one (1) week to take into account Mr Tuitupou's conduct at the hearing, which resulted in the final suspension of three (3) weeks.





Jonny Fa'amatuainu decision:


In this case, the independent judicial officer determined that the appropriate 'entry point' was six (6) weeks based on Mr Fa'amatuainu's recklessness and the vulnerable position of Mr Plante. The independent judicial officer then decreased the suspension by three (3) weeks to take into account (among other mitigating factors) Mr Fa'amatuainu's acknowledgement of guilt, good disciplinary record and remorse which resulted in the final suspension of three (3) weeks.





Martyn Williams citing decision:


In this case, the independent judicial officer determined that the appropriate 'entry point' was three (3) weeks based on (among other things) Mr Williams' intent and that Mr Paterson had been in a vulnerable position. The independent judicial officer then decreased the suspension by one (1) week to take into account (among other mitigating factors) Mr Williams' good disciplinary record, which resulted in the final suspension of two (2) weeks.
The independent judicial officer ordered Mr Williams to pay the costs of the hearing.





Jamie Cudmore citing decision:


In this case, the independent judicial officer determined that the appropriate 'entry point' was top end and merited nine (9) weeks based on (among other things) the intentional nature of the offence and on the injuries sustained by Mr Burger. The independent judicial officer then increased the suspension from the entry point to take into account Mr Cudmore's previous disciplinary record, which resulted in the final suspension of 10 weeks.
The independent judicial officer ordered Mr Cudmore to pay the costs of the hearing.

13th-October-2010, 16:36
I think we need to be careful not to try to turn Tuitoupu into a
martyr here. Considering what he did he was lucky to get 3
weeks. The fact Williams deserved at least 6 for his doesn't
change that. It just shows what a lottery the process is.

Pixie
13th-October-2010, 16:38
Willims pleaded guilty, Tuitoupou pleaded not
guilty

No, Williams did not. He said it happened, but that it wasn't a
red card offence (because, y'know, knee-dropping a guy into
the face after three goes to his face to push his head to where
it can be knee-dropped just isn't a red card offence). And
Williams didn't get credit for that, btw.





BBC reported "<S&#079;NG>Blues flanker Martyn Williams has been banned for two weeks after pleading guilty to foul play in his side's 18-17 Heineken Cup win over Edinburgh


Williams dropped his knee into full-back Chris Paterson's face during the first half of Saturday's Pool One clash.


He will miss the Blues matches against Castres on Saturday and the Scarlets Magners League derby on 22 October.


But Williams will be available for all Wales' four Autumn Tests.


As he pleaded guilty to the offence after being cited, the disciplinary hearing in Dublin imposed a less severe punishment.


Suspension for the offence in contravention of Law 10.4 (a) can range from three weeks up to a year. "</S&#079;NG>

13th-October-2010, 16:39
Martyn Williams citing decision:

In this case, the independent judicial officer determined
that the appropriate 'entry point' was three (3) weeks
based on (among other things) Mr Williams' intent and that
Mr Paterson had been in a vulnerable position. The
independent judicial officer then decreased the suspension
by one (1) week to take into account (among other
mitigating factors) Mr Williams' good disciplinary record,
which resulted in the final suspension of two (2) weeks.
The independent judicial officer ordered Mr Williams to pay
the costs of the hearing.


So he took into account the clear intent and the fact the
player attacked wasn't in a position to defend himself and
decided that meant it was the bottom of the scale. So what
would have been mid level? Lining him up and kicking his
head between the posts? Whoever made that decision
should be at the job centre tomorrow morning because
they're a moron.

Blindsider.
13th-October-2010, 16:45
For the benefit of the poor man's WUM, there is no such thing

as a dangerous spear. It's a term from League. In the Laws of

Rugby, there's only a dangerous tackle.

The term 'Garryowen' does not appear in the IRB Law book either. Neither do several other terms like 'darts' (Fla), 'scissors' (run/pass) or 'pillar' at a ruck. What does that prove?

Sam was lucky to get away with 3 weeks and should be thankful that Hodgson wasn't seriously injured. Mafi was a fool last week and has rightly paid the price. These tackles do nothing for Munster or rugby - we need to stamp them out once and for all.

dropkick
13th-October-2010, 16:49
We can have no complaints about it. 3 weeks is getting off
lightly in my view. One of these days a player will break his
neck getting spear tackled if its not cut out.

I don't know how Martyn Williams was left off with just 2
weeks for that attack. It should have been 6 at least. It
doesn't mean Tuitupou was hard done by though.

We can blame everyone else like they do in soccer or take
responsibility for the actions of Munster players.

Thomond78
13th-October-2010, 16:50
Cut the bull, Blindsider. Explain how a worse tackle gets
nothing added for deterrence, when a less serious one does.
And neither is seen as being as bad as deliberately dropping a
vulnerable guy into the face.

These decisions cannot be defended. They are hopelessly
inconsistent and irrational, internally and as between
themselves.

13th-October-2010, 16:55
Cut the bull, Blindsider. Explain how
a worse tackle gets
nothing added for deterrence, when a less serious one
does.
And neither is seen as being as bad as deliberately
dropping a
vulnerable guy into the face.

These decisions cannot be defended. They are hopelessly
inconsistent and irrational, internally and as between
themselves.

No one's defending the ERC lunacy, we're all simply saying
that bo***cks doesn't change the fact he actually got off
lightly with 3 weeks for what he did, he was an utter idiot
for doing it and needs to catch himself on as a result rather
than people try to turn it into a victimisation case. Hodgson
was clearly in distress at the point he was slammed into the
deck, he could have been seriously hurt. People need to
look back at the BOD incident where not showing proper
care separated his shoulder, if he hadn't put his arm out it's
not opinion but pretty clear cut fact the impact sufficient to
wreck his shoulder would have broken his neck. 5 years
later people are still acting like this kind of reckless
behaviour is minor - it's not and it's just luck that no one
has been left permanently crippled or dead from it.

busbi
13th-October-2010, 16:59
"The independent judicial officer increased the suspension from the
entry point by one (1) week to take into account the need for a
deterrent to combat this type of offending..."

That is cock of the highest order. Do we have no need to combat
kneeing players who can't protect themselves at the bottom of a ruck?
This line should form ground for an appeal.

I'd be very pissed off about this if i was in the Munster camp. Hopefully
they'll put it to some good use.

davidos
13th-October-2010, 17:05
The ERC are experimenting this year to see if they can fill the
MS without Munster.

13th-October-2010, 17:07
"The independent judicial officer increased
the suspension from the
entry point by one (1) week to take into account the need
for a
deterrent to combat this type of offending..."

That is cock of the highest order. Do we have no need to
combat
kneeing players who can't protect themselves at the
bottom of a ruck?
This line should form ground for an appeal.

I'd be very pissed off about this if i was in the Munster
camp. Hopefully
they'll put it to some good use.

I honestly hope we don't appeal because we've no right
really, he did what he did, he should take the punishment
for it. The ERC rubbish is a separate matter.

What should happen is the opposition should challenge the
ERC over Williams ban - it's not our business to be
involved.

busbi
13th-October-2010, 17:16
"The independent judicial
officer increased
the suspension from the
entry point by one (1) week to take into account the need
for a
deterrent to combat this type of offending..."

That is cock of the highest order. Do we have no need to
combat
kneeing players who can't protect themselves at the
bottom of a ruck?
This line should form ground for an appeal.

I'd be very pissed off about this if i was in the Munster
camp. Hopefully
they'll put it to some good use.

I honestly hope we don't appeal because we've no right
really, he did what he did, he should take the punishment
for it. The ERC rubbish is a separate matter.

What should happen is the opposition should challenge the
ERC over Williams ban - it's not our business to be
involved.

They are openly saying that they added a week for no other reason
but to make an example of him. That is completely injust and there
should be no basis for it. Players should only ever be accountable for
their own actions.

DABOSS
13th-October-2010, 17:17
Can anyone tell me the difference with these two tackles. I've just seen the tackle as I was at the match no way that was a yellow card perhaps a peno for hitting the man without the ball.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNrTsSOMazo&amp;feature=fvw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpH0B6_FdAE

You could say the are both illegal but we have seen tackles like that for years and applauded them

Clubman
13th-October-2010, 17:18
For the benefit of the poor man's WUM, there is no such thing

as a dangerous spear. It's a term from League. In the Laws of

Rugby, there's only a dangerous tackle.

The term 'Garryowen' does not appear in the IRB Law book either. Neither do several other terms like 'darts' (Fla), 'scissors' (run/pass) or 'pillar' at a ruck. What does that prove?

Sam was lucky to get away with 3 weeks and should be thankful that Hodgson wasn't seriously injured. Mafi was a fool last week and has rightly paid the price. These tackles do nothing for Munster or rugby - we need to stamp them out once and for all.


Never realised before you were Wardie. smileys/lol.gif

Blindsider.
13th-October-2010, 17:20
Thomond78 - I'm not getting into a slagging match with you (or anyone else).

Spear tackles are very high profile because they look dramatic, have the potential to cause a VERY serious injury, often happen just after the ball is gone, and the tackled player is defenceless.

Stamping, kneeing etc used to be more prevalent than they are now. 'He deserved a good shoeing' is no longer ussed in mitigation. The physical nature of midfield tackling (in this and several other instances) means that a defender is occasionally caught with the tackled player in a very vulnerable position i.e. in the air and at the mercy of the tackler.

It cannot ever be right that a player is slammed head first into the ground - the risk of serious injury is just too great. Also, injuries like this cause great damage to rugby as a whole - they are publicised in the media for ever afterwards.

I'm not going to judge every single act against Sam's to ensure they're all punished properly and relative to Sam's 3 week break - I'd be quite happy if Sam learned his lesson and brought the player to safety next time.

I have nothing more to say on this topic.

shk7619
13th-October-2010, 17:21
Simon Thomas (Wales) has been appointed as Independent Judicial Officer for the Cudmore and Tuitupou hearings.


Antony Davies (England) has been appointed as Independent Judicial Officer for the Williams and Fa'amatuainu hearings.


The fact that there is such a difference between the leniency of the two independent judicial officers is means for appeal, is it not?

13th-October-2010, 17:22
"The independent judicial
officer increased
the suspension from the
entry point by one (1) week to take into account the need
for a
deterrent to combat this type of offending..."

That is cock of the highest order. Do we have no need to
combat
kneeing players who can't protect themselves at the
bottom of a ruck?
This line should form ground for an appeal.

I'd be very pissed off about this if i was in the Munster
camp. Hopefully
they'll put it to some good use.

I honestly hope we don't appeal because we've no right
really, he did what he did, he should take the punishment
for it. The ERC rubbish is a separate matter.

What should happen is the opposition should challenge the
ERC over Williams ban - it's not our business to be
involved.

They are openly saying that they added a week for no
other reason
but to make an example of him. That is completely injust
and there
should be no basis for it. Players should only ever be
accountable for
their own actions.

You could equally argue they took a week off for previous
good behaviour when someone has already posted he's
been banned for stamping on 2 occasions and he's
apparently said Mafi's actions the previous week was
nothing really. So in fact he's got the ban he would have
got without that.

To argue he's not getting what he deserves is seriously
debatable. Bottom end if 3 weeks, he chose to carry on
and tip the guy over and send him down, his actions, his
problem 3 weeks is lucky considering so I think it's totally
spurious to complain about anything and try to get it
reduced. He got the bottom level ban, I and from the looks
of it many others think he got lucky with that. Don't forget
they can increase if you appeal. He also pleaded not guilty
when there's no way he could argue he didn't tip him over
or did control his descent. He could have got more on that
basis as well.

In short, if we don't like the time maybe we should be
telling the players not to do such dumb things.

Benny
13th-October-2010, 17:25
3 weeks is about as good as you could expect to get. It will give Sam T a wake up call and it is up to him to make sure he steers clear of doing anything of this nature in the future.

handslikefeet
13th-October-2010, 17:30
Simon Thomas (Wales) has been appointed as Independent Judicial Officer for the Cudmore and Tuitupou hearings.


Antony Davies (England) has been appointed as Independent Judicial Officer for the Williams and Fa'amatuainu hearings.


The fact that there is such a difference between the leniency of the two independent judicial officers is means for appeal, is it not?





The fact that there is also a vast difference in the offences to warrant the citings would probably negate that...

Dave Cahill
13th-October-2010, 17:34
[QUOTE=Evil OmerLining him up and kicking his

head between the posts? [/QUOTE]

Not an option for Nugget.

13th-October-2010, 17:35
The only way you can appeal on basis of other bans is going
to be direct comparison. So if you knee drop someone in the
head at a ruck and get more than Williams you'd be able to
make a case. You'd have no moral grounds to do so because
you're a scumbag c**t but you'd be able to make a case.

13th-October-2010, 17:36
[QUOTE=Evil OmerLining him up and kicking his
head between the posts? Not an option for
Nugget.[/QUOTE]

I was tempted to reference his kicking attempt as well but
resisted smileys/wink.gif

Dave Cahill
13th-October-2010, 17:38
I can resist anything, except temptation.












Yes, finally! Used it in context!!!smileys/lol.gif

13th-October-2010, 17:41
I can resist anything, except
temptation.Yes, finally! Used it in context!!!smileys/lol.gif


smileys/lol.gif

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 17:43
The only way you can appeal on basis of other bans is going

to be direct comparison....

You can appeal for any reason you wish.

13th-October-2010, 17:53
The only way you can appeal on basis
of other bans is going
to be direct comparison....You can appeal for any
reason you wish.

OK for the sake of the pedantic, the only realistic way you
will be able to call in a comparison with another ban is if
you can make a direct comparison on the offence,
otherwise they're just going to say different offence they
can't be compared. So it would be a waste of time saying
why did I get 3 weeks for this when he only got 2 weeks
for doing something totally different.

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 18:18
"The independent judicial
officer increased
the suspension from the
entry point by one (1) week to take into account the need
for a
deterrent to combat this type of offending..."

That is cock of the highest order. Do we have no need to
combat
kneeing players who can't protect themselves at the
bottom of a ruck?
This line should form ground for an appeal.

I'd be very pissed off about this if i was in the Munster
camp. Hopefully
they'll put it to some good use.

I honestly hope we don't appeal because we've no right
really, he did what he did, he should take the punishment
for it. The ERC rubbish is a separate matter.

What should happen is the opposition should challenge the
ERC over Williams ban - it's not our business to be
involved.

They are openly saying that they added a week for no
other reason
but to make an example of him. That is completely injust
and there
should be no basis for it. Players should only ever be
accountable for
their own actions.

You could equally argue they took a week off for previous
good behaviour when someone has already posted he's
been banned for stamping on 2 occasions and he's
apparently said Mafi's actions the previous week was
nothing really. So in fact he's got the ban he would have
got without that.

To argue he's not getting what he deserves is seriously
debatable. Bottom end if 3 weeks, he chose to carry on
and tip the guy over and send him down, his actions, his
problem 3 weeks is lucky considering so I think it's totally
spurious to complain about anything and try to get it
reduced. He got the bottom level ban, I and from the looks
of it many others think he got lucky with that. Don't forget
they can increase if you appeal. He also pleaded not guilty
when there's no way he could argue he didn't tip him over
or did control his descent. He could have got more on that
basis as well.

In short, if we don't like the time maybe we should be
telling the players not to do such dumb things.


Totally agree there was no reason for him to turn the player upside down and release him. He got what he deserved andgot off lighter then I expected. Me I'm a lot more concerned that Munsters discipline in 2 games has resulted in 10 weeks of player non availability. 6 games into the season and we have lost 2 players to stupid acts. Management needs to knock some heads together in the privacy of the dressing room.

Speedy
13th-October-2010, 18:25
In fairness the 3 weeks is reason re the bans handed to Fourie and Cooper in the summer. (Although adding the extra week is bollix).

2 weeks for pinning a player down to the ground and kneeing in them the head is madness. I hope the change from 3 judicial officers to 1 doesnt mean we end up with more of these inconsistent sentences. Already it seems if you're before the Welsh guy you're in trouble but the English guy is softer. At least with the 3 j.o's it was a bit more consistant over the last few years. The last thing they want is sentences varying depending on the j.o. It's not the District Court.

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 18:30
OK for the sake of the pedantic, the only realistic way you

will be able to call in a comparison with another ban is if

you can make a direct comparison on the offence,

otherwise they're just going to say different offence they

can't be compared. So it would be a waste of time saying

why did I get 3 weeks for this when he only got 2 weeks

for doing something totally different.

As I said any reason, not merely comparative sanctions.

Infacta you don't even have to provide a reason for lodging an appeal.

13th-October-2010, 18:33
OK for the sake of the pedantic, the
only realistic way you
will be able to call in a comparison with another ban is if
you can make a direct comparison on the offence,
otherwise they're just going to say different offence they
can't be compared. So it would be a waste of time saying
why did I get 3 weeks for this when he only got 2 weeks
for doing something totally different.As I said any
reason, not merely comparative sanctions.Infacta you don't
even have to provide a reason for lodging an
appeal.

You're just doing this to annoy aren't you - you know
exactly what I mean. It would be pointless to try to use a
different case with a different offence to appeal against
differing ban lengths as they can very easily argue it's not
the same offence so can't be compared. I'm not saying
they can't appeal just it would be pointless on the basis
suggested of appealing by comparing to another incident
and ban level.

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 18:59
You're just doing this to annoy aren't you - you know

exactly what I mean. It would be pointless to try to use a

different case with a different offence to appeal against

differing ban lengths as they can very easily argue it's not

the same offence so can't be compared. I'm not saying

they can't appeal just it would be pointless on the basis

suggested of appealing by comparing to another incident

and ban level.

Not at all EO. The problem is you can't see further beyond what you've opined (ad nauseum).

Surely you can appreciate that there are potentially more grounds for an appeal than "he did the same as me but got off lighter".

If you can't let's just leave it at that.

sewa
13th-October-2010, 19:06
EO you are fantastically restrained. When you are blindsided by a dig offa fella at the bottom of a ruck you are never even tempted to hit him back with a cheapshot yourself. A paragon of virtue

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 19:09
You're just doing this to annoy aren't you - you know
exactly what I mean. It would be pointless to try to use a
different case with a different offence to appeal against
differing ban lengths as they can very easily argue it's not
the same offence so can't be compared. I'm not saying
they can't appeal just it would be pointless on the basis
suggested of appealing by comparing to another incident
and ban level.

Not at all EO. The problem is you can't see further beyond what you've opined (ad nauseum).

Surely you can appreciate that there are potentially more grounds for an appeal than "he did the same as me but got off lighter".

If you can't let's just leave it at that.





If you do go to an appeal I think you would need a pretty good reason. ST was lucky he got 3 weeks (entry level). On what bases would you or anyone else suggest he appeals, bearing in mind if he did appeal and lost the appeal he might find himself facing a couple more weeks on the side line.

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 19:21
If you do go to an appeal I think you would need a pretty good reason. ST was lucky he got 3 weeks (entry level). On what bases would you or anyone else suggest he appeals, bearing in mind if he did appeal and lost the appeal he might find himself facing a couple more weeks on the side line.

No idea. I'm not making it (the appeal).

I agree you'd need a very good reason or compelling new evidence to succeed, but no greats grounds nor reasoning to actually lodge one.

p.s. Remember the Lassissi biting case and successful appeal?

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 19:41
If you do go to an appeal I think you would need a pretty good reason. ST was lucky he got 3 weeks (entry level). On what bases would you or anyone else suggest he appeals, bearing in mind if he did appeal and lost the appeal he might find himself facing a couple more weeks on the side line.




No idea. I'm not making it (the appeal).

I agree you'd need a very good reason or compelling new evidence to succeed, but no greats grounds nor reasoning to actually lodge one.

p.s. Remember the Lassissi biting case and successful appeal?



Yes I remember that but the big difference is that there was no rodent recorded doing the biting or for that matter any player. While with ST you have the pictures of him picking up a player who was standing, rotating him 180 degrees and then dropping the said player.


Again I'll say if you do appeal and engage the expense and time of the citing committee you would need a very good reason otherwise thay could take the view you are wasting their time and add to the current sanction. Case in point maybe the fact Munster did not appeal Mafi's 7 week suspension. Maybe they thought he got a good result?


Tell me say if we fail to qualify for the knock our stages of the HC (god forbid) are you going to say well that was due to the verdicts of an IRFU citing committee and a ERC citing committee in banning 2 players or are you going to say well there are 2 professional players who know the laws and regulations broke them and cost us a possible q/f?

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 19:57
Yes I remember that but the big difference is that there was no rodent recorded doing the biting or for that matter any player. While with ST you have the pictures of him picking up a player who was standing, rotating him 180 degrees and then dropping the said player.


Again I'll say if you do appeal and engage the expense and time of the citing committee you would need a very good reason otherwise thay could take the view you are wasting their time and add to the current sanction. Case in point maybe the fact Munster did not appeal Mafi's 7 week suspension. Maybe they thought he got a good result?


Tell me say if we fail to qualify for the knock our stages of the HC (god forbid) are you going to say well that was due to the verdicts of an IRFU citing committee and a ERC citing committee in banning 2 players or are you going to say well there are 2 professional players who know the laws and regulations broke them and cost us a possible q/f?

You're missing the point with respect.

The Lassissi appeal was based on compelling new evidence (farcical in my view) that was somehow accepted.

Time, cost, and the chance of increased sanctions are all valid reasons not to lodge an appeal, but that doesn't stop it happening sometimes. Quinny's stamp is a good example.

If we fail this season I really don't know what I'll say. That depends on a lot of future events.

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 20:10
Yes I remember that but the big difference is that there was no rodent recorded doing the biting or for that matter any player. While with ST you have the pictures of him picking up a player who was standing, rotating him 180 degrees and then dropping the said player.


Again I'll say if you do appeal and engage the expense and time of the citing committee you would need a very good reason otherwise thay could take the view you are wasting their time and add to the current sanction. Case in point maybe the fact Munster did not appeal Mafi's 7 week suspension. Maybe they thought he got a good result?


Tell me say if we fail to qualify for the knock our stages of the HC (god forbid) are you going to say well that was due to the verdicts of an IRFU citing committee and a ERC citing committee in banning 2 players or are you going to say well there are 2 professional players who know the laws and regulations broke them and cost us a possible q/f?




You're missing the point with respect.

The Lassissi appeal was based on compelling new evidence (farcical in my view) that was somehow accepted.

Time, cost, and the chance of increased sanctions are all valid reasons not to lodge an appeal, but that doesn't stop it happening sometimes. Quinny's stamp is a good example.

If we fail this season I really don't know what I'll say. That depends on a lot of future events.







Compelling 'new' evidence yes because it all happened off camera. So no one could prove or disprove it (farcical I agree). While with ST after seeing the pictures it would be pretty hard to produce any compelling evidence to change the verdict. About the only possible compelling evidence wouild be to claim the player involved is into gymnastics and thought STwas a horizontal bar and decided to do a flip that failed. Not sure if that would wash with the citing committee though...

Mebawsa Ritchie
13th-October-2010, 20:20
Compelling 'new' evidence yes because it all happened off camera. So no one could prove or disprove it (farcical I agree). While with ST after seeing the pictures it would be pretty hard to produce any compelling evidence to change the verdict. About the only possible compelling evidence wouild be to claim the player involved is into gymnastics and thought STwas a horizontal bar and decided to do a flip that failed. Not sure if that would wash with the citing committee though...

Your mind is closed on this idea clearly.

I have no idea what they might come up with on appeal should they decide to lodge one. They obviously thought they had a chance in the Quinny case too.

McCloud
13th-October-2010, 20:34
Compelling 'new' evidence yes because it all happened off camera. So no one could prove or disprove it (farcical I agree). While with ST after seeing the pictures it would be pretty hard to produce any compelling evidence to change the verdict. About the only possible compelling evidence wouild be to claim the player involved is into gymnastics and thought STwas a horizontal bar and decided to do a flip that failed. Not sure if that would wash with the citing committee though...

Your mind is closed on this idea clearly.

I have no idea what they might come up with on appeal should they decide to lodge one. They obviously thought they had a chance in the Quinny case too.



Have you watched the footage of the 'tackle'? Do you disagree on the following points?


1. Player was on his feet.


2. Sam T goes into contact and lifts the player off his feet and turns him 180 degrees.


3. Sam T then drops him.


My mind is not closed but I'm asking you on what grounds could Sam T and Munster appeal? Open my mind.


WTFhas quinnies appeal got to do with Sam T's?