Do Not Sell My Personal Information
RugbyDump RugbyDump
Thursday Nov 24, 2016

Calum Clark banned for 3 weeks for elbow on Donncha O'Callaghan

Calum Clark banned for 3 weeks for elbow on Donncha O'Callaghan
37
Comments

Northampton Saints flanker Calum Clark has been suspended for three weeks after he pleaded guilty to striking Worcester Warriors lock Donncha O’Callaghan with the elbow during their Aviva Premiership match this past weekend.

Clark was cited following the match and faced a disciplinary hearing in Coventry yesterday. He pleaded guilty to committing dangerous play, under Law 10.4(a) for striking.

Clark and O’Callaghan came to blows in the first half when the England-capped flanker dropped down on the former Ireland lock, appearing to make contact with the face with his elbow.

A RFU disciplinary panel, comprising of HHJ Sean Enright (Chairman), Tony Wheat and Chris Skaife, found that Clark showed genuine remorse during the hearing. 

“The panel found this was not a premeditated act but an intentional strike to the head of an opponent that merited a mid-range entry point of three weeks. The player’s remorse before the panel was genuine and heartfelt.”

It was not mentioned in the statement if Clark’s previous indiscretions came into consideration.

In 2008 Clark was red carded for a headbutt at the Junior World Championship.

In 2012 he was banned for 32 weeks after he deliberately hyper-extended the arm of Rob Hawkins, which caused a fractured elbow. At the time it was ruled that it was intentional, yet there ‘was no evidence that he intended to cause a serious injury’.

In recent years he appears to have turned his career around, but this latest incident won’t do his reputation any favours. He will be free to play again on 13 December 2016.

In the same match, Worcester Warriors’ Ryan Mills committed a dangerous tackle (contrary to Law 10.4(e)), and has been suspended for two weeks.

37 Comments

  • badge
    11:27 PM 29/11/2016

    He's improving all the time DrG! He used his elbow this time instead of breaking someone else's! I think Cudmore might have to dig deeper than ten shades. Clark sports the entire shit palette on his CV.

    Reply
  • drg
    1:50 PM 28/11/2016

    To ban Picamoles this close to the incident would make too much sense.... they'll just wait a few months and then do it...

    Reply
  • jonnyenglish
    9:53 AM 28/11/2016

    Call it forwards intuition...

    Reply
  • jimmy23
    8:28 AM 28/11/2016

    Wait... you knew?! HOW?!?!

    Reply
  • jonnyenglish
    7:26 PM 27/11/2016

    You're a Saints fan? Never! ;)

    Reply
  • drg
    12:49 PM 26/11/2016

    Hahaha you might not be far off, I can imagine the conversations, "bill you're rubbish at this, everyone in RD said it was probably a fair ban! Mike is still the master, the French are going bananas at his bans!"

    Reply
  • drg
    12:46 PM 26/11/2016

    That makes sense then.... Phew, thought I was missing out on something!

    Reply
  • jimmy23
    3:15 AM 26/11/2016

    Even as a passionate Saints fan, I can't defend this guy. No amount of talent or ability can excuse you from multiple dirty acts on this level. End of story.

    Reply
  • danknapp
    12:36 AM 26/11/2016

    I reckon the citing commissioners just dare each other to make up the most ridiculous rulings they can think of, and laugh themselves silly at us going mental on RD, whilst furiously asphyxi-wanking themselves into comas.

    Reply
  • danknapp
    12:33 AM 26/11/2016

    I wouldn't trust us to sharpen a box of pencils, don't know why you'd trust us with this.

    Reply
  • danknapp
    12:31 AM 26/11/2016

    YOU can't.

    Reply
  • cluainoir
    4:49 PM 25/11/2016

    Cheap and deliberate cowardly shot. Given his disciplinary history the 3 week ban is laughable. It will not act as a deterrent. The disciplinary officers should hang their collective heads in shame.

    Reply
  • stroudos
    2:45 PM 25/11/2016

    That's better. :)

    Reply
  • stroudos
    2:40 PM 25/11/2016

    What I found particularly galling about the Hawkins incident was that he deliberately - yes, disciplinary officer - deliberately, sought to injure a hooker's throwing arm! I mean, it's like kick a porn star in the plums just before he goes on set...

    Reply
  • oliver
    12:39 PM 25/11/2016

    I'm just glad they didn't ban Picamoles for playing in the same club as Clark....

    Reply
  • jonnyenglish
    11:32 AM 25/11/2016

    I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire.

    Reply
  • rugbydump
    9:52 AM 25/11/2016

    Way too much trust in the RD audience clearly, but fair point. Amended ;)

    Reply
  • jonnyenglish
    9:44 AM 25/11/2016

    Scumbag, nothing more to say.

    Reply
  • denis
    9:32 AM 25/11/2016

    O'Callaghan should have given him a good few more. I am echoing other comments, but i'll say it anyway, Clark is a coward as a well as a thug.

    Reply
  • colombes
    9:14 AM 25/11/2016

    the butterfly-half effect.

    Reply
  • drg
    9:09 AM 25/11/2016

    Hahaha, your dislike for him is awesome! I seriously don't know how they judged his hawkins arm break to be something that wasn't intended to cause injury, it was 100% unnecessary, it wouldn't have moved Hawkins, it wasn't as if Hawkins arm was over the ball, or any other potential 'mitigating' factor (and even then, it's a hard push to convince me!)... I hope he never plays for England again, he shouldn't play for any country with those actions.

    Reply
  • drg
    1:20 AM 25/11/2016

    Well, I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who still thinks Clark is a bell end... He's been quiet for a little while now, I wasn't sure if that meant everyone was going to just sort of forget his past, and I'd have to pretend I didn't remember it so as to not seem like a moody old git... But alas, we moody bastards can unite once again in our distinct dislike of this prick.

    Reply
  • drg
    1:05 AM 25/11/2016

    ....wait, violence isn't the only reason to play??? I didn't realise I could make friends through rugby!

    Reply
  • dancarter
    11:32 PM 24/11/2016

    If they are going to take remorse into account during disciplinary hearings, it should only be used for the first offense. Clark's remorse for the Hawkins incident was clearly insignificant, if it even existed at all, and he clearly hasn't learned from it. If you claim to be remorseful then keep on doing the things you are being remorseful for then your 'remorse' is worthless.

    Reply
  • stroudos
    10:55 PM 24/11/2016

    Don't know for a fact Dan, but I hope that tache is a Movember effort. But it does make him look more accurately like the tosser that he undoubtedly is.

    Reply
  • stroudos
    10:53 PM 24/11/2016

    DrG, He is a recidivist and a cheapshot scumbag. He's also a sneaky coward. The worst kind of violent offender - breaking a bloke's arm while he's prone on the ground unable to defend himself; launching himself here at a bloke on the ground who's rolling away and unable to defend himself. Should have been banned for life for the arm-break and three weeks for this is also absurdly lenient.

    Reply
  • stroudos
    10:42 PM 24/11/2016

    Cheap shots don't get much more cowardly than that. Oh, sorry I forgot, this scumbag has done a much more cowardly cheap shot, breaking the arm of a bloke who was in a vulnerable position and unable to defend himself. He should have been banned from all forms of rugby for life. 32 weeks despite an entry point of 5 years was a total miscarriage of justice. RD - got to take issue with the write-up above. These two statements do not belong in the same paragraph: "he deliberately hyper-extended the arm of Rob Hawkins, which caused a fractured elbow" "there was no evidence that he intended to cause a serious injury". I would suggest that you should make it clear you're quoting the disciplinary officer, I think quotation marks and a qualifier such as "unbelievably, the disciplinary officer said that..." As for this incident, I just can't fathom what goes through such a despicable twat's brain that makes them think deliberately blindsiding a bloke who's on the ground with a forearm smash could possibly be a good idea. I note the panel ruled it was not premeditated - well only Arseface Clark would know for certain, but that looked precisely what it was to me: a pre-meditated, deliberate cheap shot. As for this bullshit about showing remorse: A) I don't give a shit, and B) surely the remorse was driven by a quite justified fear that they would throw the book at him this time. Three weeks?? Pathetic. Another total travesty of justice. I just hope that Eddie Jones, on watching this, makes an irreversible decision to never select Clark for England. He's been quite forgiving of players with past misdemeanours so far, (cf Hartley) and it's worked out pretty well so far, but this swine is in a different league. He should never have been capped for England at all and I really don't want to see this prick ever pull on an England shirt again.

    Reply
  • stroudos
    10:24 PM 24/11/2016

    I would have happily watched O'Callaghan unload punch after punch after punch on this cowardly piece of shit. He could still be punching him now and I'd urge him to keep going.

    Reply
  • dancarter
    7:44 PM 24/11/2016

    3 weeks seems lenient, especially given his previous offences. Could have been very serious for DO'C had that elbow landed flush.

    Reply
  • 7:38 PM 24/11/2016

    Some play rugby for the thrill, some for the friendship others like him for the violence. Shameful act and very dangerous

    Reply
  • drg
    6:41 PM 24/11/2016

    Don't worry Colombes, the rugby universe always balances out, somewhere a Frenchman is being handed a large ban with the extra weeks removed from Clark's ban on top....

    Reply
  • danknapp
    5:26 PM 24/11/2016

    He should have been given an extra month for that rapey 'tach.

    Reply
  • joeybinbags
    5:04 PM 24/11/2016

    Melon

    Reply
  • mellors89
    4:26 PM 24/11/2016

    Clark is a prick. I'm surprised nothing was done about O'Callaghan's punch to Clarks face though.

    Reply
  • moo
    4:24 PM 24/11/2016

    *Hawkins, obviously

    Reply
  • moo
    4:21 PM 24/11/2016

    I share your dislike, Dr G. He's either completely thick or the bloke has a screw loose (or both). If you judge a man by his actions... It's not like it's been hard to spot his indiscretions either (junior RWC red card, some examples when he played at Leeds and the Rob Harkins incident). The sanction for the last was nothing short of ridiculous. The judgement that he didn't mean to cause injury was mindboggling. Should have banned him for 5 years. http://www.englandrugby.com/mm/Document/Governance/Disclipine/01/31/05/14/RFUDisciplinaryJudgment-ThursdayMarch29-CalumClark_Neutral.pdf

    Reply
  • drg
    3:43 PM 24/11/2016

    As a philosopher once wrote "haters gonna hate hate hate hate".. ...and I have a distinct dislike for Mr Clark due to that horrendous incident years ago... Is it time to go all Frozen and let it go? Or should we keep up the dislike for the bloke? He's an arsehole yes, but is it his fault he continues to play? Not really.... I can't help feel that my dislike will only slightly be satisfied when someone the likes Cudmore beats ten shades of shit out of Clark...

    Reply


Great Tries

View All

Big Hits & Dirty Play

View All

See It To Believe It

View All

Funnies

View All

Amateur

View All

Player Features

View All
Calum Clark banned for 3 weeks for elbow on Donncha O'Callaghan | RugbyDump - Rugby News & Videos