Do Not Sell My Personal Information
RugbyDump RugbyDump
Tuesday May 20, 2014

The Shortball from Rugby HQ - Round 14

The Shortball from Rugby HQ - Round 14
18
Comments

It was a fascinating weekend of Super Rugby with some controversial incidents, amidst epic performances. We’ll have more on some of those soon hopefully but for now here is a very quick rundown of some of the best moments from the weekend, with Rugby HQ’s Shortball.

View all Shortball and Plays of the Week (and month) clips in the our archive

18 Comments

  • rugbydump
    10:45 AM 22/05/2014

    Appreciated. As you were.

    Reply
  • reality
    10:38 AM 22/05/2014

    Jon, appreciate the clarification about the post. Regarding the potential victim, it depends on who it is and what relationship he has with the aggressor. He could recognise that the guy did it in the heat of the moment and not want him to get in trouble since it was out of character. They could be friends and he wouldn't want his mate to get in trouble; I don't know. In any case, considering that everything points to him being innocent then fair enough; I can accept that. As I said, I only had one angle to base my judgement on and there didn't seem to be any ambiguity from that angle. If there's convincing evidence that I haven't seen to the contrary, then I accept it.

    Reply
  • danknapp
    6:27 AM 22/05/2014

    Agreed, it was just a light-hearted dig at the fans' favourite, Mr Steve Walsh.

    Reply
  • stroudos
    5:56 AM 22/05/2014

    Sorry mate. Didn't really think of it as swearing at the time, just pub vernacular, where "dirty ******" would carry no more weight than "bloke". Anyway, dressing down duly noted. Cheers.

    Reply
  • rugbydump
    1:57 PM 21/05/2014

    Post and video to follow, but you can't really judge based on this short clip. Horwill has been proven to be correct in his view - it wasn't an eyegouge at all. There was no evidence of it on Higginbotham's face post match, or by his reaction at the time. Also, go easy with the language and name calling please, Stroudos, especially as in this instance when you're incorrect.

    Reply
  • reality
    11:59 AM 21/05/2014

    Jon, I did in fact read the above. However, even if Higginbotham doesn't want to get his mate into trouble and claims there was nothing in it, if the facts and video evidence say otherwise then his claims don't really mean much. As Stroudos said, if there were other angles that proved his innocence, then fine, but from the video available here it looks very much like he sticks his fingers in his eyes.

    Reply
  • stroudos
    7:00 AM 21/05/2014

    Fair enough, if that's what the disciplinary hearing found. They must have had other camera angles though, because from the above it looks about as blatant a "contact with the eye area" offence as you'll see.

    Reply
  • stroudos
    6:58 AM 21/05/2014

    The "he is not a thug" defence doesn't wash when you're deliberately stamping on someone's face.

    Reply
  • 2:45 AM 21/05/2014

    Horwill probably hasn't read how to make friends and influence people.

    Reply
  • 2:43 AM 21/05/2014

    Simmer down Jon, simmer down. That being said, if it wasn't an eye gouge, it looked close to a fish hook. Didn't see the whole incident so hard to judge, but based on what I saw a penalty was deserved if not a yellow

    Reply
  • reality
    11:12 PM 20/05/2014

    Judging from the evidence of that clip it looks like it was a pretty clear gouge. Am I missing something? Was the guy found not guilty the same way Horwill was when he stamped on a fella's head and claimed he was trying to regain his balance? Or was this actually a legitimate defence?

    Reply
  • eddie-g
    9:31 PM 20/05/2014

    @DanKnapp No blame for Walsh here. Bad call from the TMO, but if he says there's been gouge, you don't exactly leave the ref with many options.

    Reply
  • karimabuseer
    9:21 PM 20/05/2014

    Agreed. Regardless, you play the game ahead of you. What kicked off the scuffle?

    Reply
  • danknapp
    8:56 PM 20/05/2014

    I am a novice. I keep forgetting to make the points I want to make. Clearly despite the decision, Horwill should keep his mouth shut until he gets into the changing room... even if it is Steve Walsh.

    Reply
  • danknapp
    8:54 PM 20/05/2014

    I would say that if O'Donoghue has been found not guilty, especially with Higginbotham's testimony, then it was a bad decision. I gather the reversed penalty decision cost them the game. I'd be interested in seeing the interaction between the TMO and Walsh. Can you find it RD?

    Reply
  • eddie-g
    4:58 PM 20/05/2014

    @Stroudos No defence of Horwill for his what he said of the ref. But of the actual incident, O'Donoghue was cleared by the citing people and the red card rescinded. So the Reds were unlucky with how the game turned out. That said, the Reds have underperformed all year. This despite having most of the team which won the competition three years ago. So I think there's a lot of frustration behind Horwill's comments - losing to the Rebels at home? Struth, mate - but he will be punished, and I don't think the Super XV suits will be feeling charitable.

    Reply
  • alasdairduncan3
    3:58 PM 20/05/2014

    @stroudos, I didn't watch the match so this is purely speculation. Surely he's talking about another event, nobody's stupid enough to defend an eye gouging like that!

    Reply
  • stroudos
    3:23 PM 20/05/2014

    Well Horwill's gone right down in my estimations. Slagging off the ref in his post-match interview is bad enough in itself, but is he seriously defending that dirty fucker with his fingers all over a bloke's eyes? Can't believe that stamp by Deysel - had no idea he was that sort of dirty thug. That is outrageous. Looked very deliberate too.

    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
The Shortball from Rugby HQ - Round 14 | RugbyDump - Rugby News & Videos