Viewing comments for Conman
You have to look at the actual judgement in each case to understand what the ruling is, people focus too much on the final number. It was deemed to be a mid range offence = 8 weeks. This seems correct to me. One week was added for aggrivating factors (deterent to others). 4 weeks were deducted for mitigating factors (previous good record). All judgements follow this format and if you follow that you'll see that judgements are actually relatively uniform, at least allowing for individual interpretations.
I think in this instance they got it about right. It is a mid range offence, it's pretty much the definition of a tip tackle which is minimum mid range but not an upper range offence as he didn't drive him into the ground and no injury occured, plus there was a secondary tackler to consider.
2 Years, 6 Months ago
Yea, I agree. Terrible decision to sin bin Hooper. It was a penalty against Etzebeth for jumping into the tackle. Hooper did absolutely nothing wrong.
2 Years, 7 Months ago
Disgraceful power grab by the English and French clubs. The IRB need to be very careful here in how they let this situation develop. Who knows perhaps the IRB will be next on their hitlist after they dismantle the ERC? Are the RFU and FFR now completely impotent?
The reduction of the number of teams to 20 is simply a case of wanting a bigger slice of the pie. It will mean not only will the money be spread around less teams but it will increase the chances of more of their teams being involved in the quarters (3 from 5 second place qualifiers). Note the Irish and Welsh don’t seem to upset about this either!
I take COS’ point that developing teams in the Amlin may be better for them in the long run but that would only be true if the funds are split properly so that you don’t create a two tier system. (Look at the example of the parachute payments for relegated teams in the EPL, allowing Championship teams to come up and compete without fear of going bust or not spending and getting destroyed like Derby only getting 11 points one year).
I’m not necessarily against merit based qualification but I do believe that it is not in the interests of the game to have a situation where one country is excluded for one to potentially many years from the main European competition. We’re supposed to be developing rugby globally not stuffing the already rich coffers of the English and French clubs.
2 Years, 8 Months ago
You don't lower your head and close your eyes, you lower your body/hips and keep your head looking up at the spot you want to hit.... (drive up) but maybe that's the reason so many players are getting concussed from putting their head in the wrong place!
Either way it's not an excuse for a high tackle
2 Years, 11 Months ago
Thanks for the answer suntzu, I was wondering about that. I think the key point of confusion was that between Barnes first saying the ball couldn't go out and then saying it a second time the clock had run out.
Given that the restart options are scrum or retake, not a penalty, then surely the time is up?
3 Years, 20 Hours ago
I'd say that tackle fairly slowed him down, no?
3 Years, 5 Days ago
I agree #10, although it's borderline so a yellow more than a red for me based on the tackle. What turns it into a red though is how late and unnecessary it is. This whole dummy runner excuse is nonsense, he had plenty of time to see BOD didn't get the ball but he set himself, lifted him up and drove through the tackle to knock him over.
Completley unnecessary and potentially dangerous, therefore, he deserves a ban. It's a cheap shot basically.
3 Years, 1 Month ago
Botha obviously has a fairly bad reputation but I can't for the life of me see anything wrong here. He's runing flat out, at pace, on a great line. Unfortunate for Ayerza to get injured but no blame whatsoever on Botha. These things happen in contact sport.
As for the disallowed try, I can see why the ref disallowed it but watching the slow mo, it's clear Ayerza didn't hold him in the tackle, so Botha is allowed to get up, before he can he is tackled again and then places the ball over the line. If you take the secondary tackle as the completed tackle, he's allowed one movement, so I believe the try should have stood. No blame to the ref calling what he sees but a TMO may have awarded it on that basis.
3 Years, 1 Month ago
Perhaps if you removed your palm from your face for a second you might see that deliberately kicking an opponent on a rugby field is completely unacceptable! So yea, ROG is 'the bad one' in this case....
3 Years, 4 Months ago
He's been cited for deliberately kicking an opponent, which has a low end entry point of 4 weeks and mid-level entry point of 8 weeks. So presuming he can't deny his guilt and given his previous record he's probably due 1/2 weeks reduction, so looking at either 2/3 weeks or 6/7 weeks depending on what view the panel takes.
The grey area is whether it's viewed as more of a foot trip (low end) or he used an amount of force in a kick (mid-level). For me, it's borderline so I'd probably go low end provided it was acommpanied by the appropriate remorse.
3 Years, 4 Months ago