 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
"You can tell which one of us sits behind a f***ing desk!"
I take it back, that was a thunderbolt of a (sneaky) punch mind.
[url=
On the high end for a nose tweak, though.
😀
Had we managed to loose he'd have thought 8 weeks was a bargain price for the 15 v 14 win. He'd be the toast of Wales for those 8 weeks.
@grahamt1980 - missed your link earlier, so did most here while arguing about not much of anything ... 😯
EDIT (too old): @loum my point is the rwc is now the clear pinnacle of international rugby, the 6N after is always a rebuilding year and its too early for Lions selection to be of interest. Personally I have for a number of years seen the Investec games against RSA or NZ as probably more important. The 6N is an excellent torunament and the losses to Wales and Ireland when we had a shot at grand slams where telling and big important games lost when the pressure was on. Its just a psersonal view but I've not paid to watch England v Italy more than twice and one if those was an away game as I'd never done a Rome international.
Although he (the beat copper) did come up with the great line after Paul Ackford (the Inspector) had been knocked out by that Frederico Mendez punch at Twickenham in 1990:
I was at that game. (Don't know what I did to deserve it! 😆 )
It gives me a warm feeling when I remember Dooley is a citing officer now.
To be fair, what Wade Dooley didn't know about dirty play...
Wasn't mendez still a teenager at the time of the incident?
I think he was 19 - could be wrong.
Although it was an awesome punch it was a bit of a cheap shot as Ackford was looking the other way. Mendez was sent off although generally if two big blokes squared off against each other the ref would just tell them to calm down and get on with the game.
The good old days.....
I saw Neil Back get a good smack from an AB. Asked about it after the game Back said, "I might have been holding on" 😉
What is the betting Marler gets a token short ban for the elbow and the verbal gets swept under the rug and forgotten by next week by the media?
Apparently Wade Dooley's line to the ref as he came round after being ****ted by a rather young and enthusiastic newcomer (who happened to be called Martin Johnson"
"Don't-send-him-orfff...."
jambalaya - Member
@grahamt1980 - missed your link earlier, so did most here while arguing about not much of anything ...POSTED 12 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST
#jambabollocks. I supposed it would have only been "anything" if he had called him Jewish,eh?
What is the betting Marler gets a token short ban for the elbow and the verbal gets swept under the rug and forgotten by next week by the media?
What verbal? 😉
No idea, but did you see that elbow? 😉
I liked the excuse from John Beattie after a Calcutta Cup match when he'd famously decked Wade Dooley near the start of the match:
"I thought it was Maurice Colclough".
Apparently the plan had been to rile Colclough as he'd supposedly been scared of Beattie on the Lions Tour of NZ. However the plan backfired as everyone knew that you weren't supposed to upset "The Swamp Thing" at all costs.
Law 10.4 a: "Punching or striking. A player must not strike an opponent with the fist or arm, including the elbow, shoulder, head or knee(s)."Sanction: Penalty kick."
Is this still the law? If so, all the yellow/red cards and bans for punching are total bollocks.
Is this still the law? If so, all the yellow/red cards and bans for punching are total bollocks.
Yes. However, if you take a few seconds and read further you'll see why the further punishments are not bollocks. It always surprises me when incidents like this are discussed, how few people actually take the time to read through the laws properly or find out why there is citing and how it works.
However, if you take a few seconds and read further
I can't - I've got the modern day affliction of having an attention span of about 10 seconds...... 🙂
OK I read futher and got to the bit about yellow cards and stuff - fair enough.
My point is - it's getting a bit like wendy-ball with all this "hands to the face" nonsense. The Ashton banning was plain ludicrous.
The best comment I heard was from Aussie League legend, Andrew Johns, when commentating on an NRL game:
"They ruined it all when they changed the laws so that a bloke could no longer punch another bloke."
He was referring to the "afters" at the play-the-ball when a gobby little scrum half would push and shove an 18st prop and get no retaliation. THe same applies in Union so ****s like Owen Farrell or Mike Brown can run up and shove some huge forward who can no longer lamp them in return.
THe same applies in Union so **** like Owen Farrell or Mike Brown can run up and shove some huge forward who can no longer lamp them in return.
You just have to think laterally, England have a specialist "sparkling repartee" coach for just this situation (well obviously not the exact one as Brown and Farrell don't shove English players).
England have a specialist "sparkling repartee" coach
Has he been working with Joe Marler? 😆
My point is - it's getting a bit like wendy-ball with all this "hands to the face" nonsense. The Ashton banning was plain ludicrous.
The rule for "hands to the face" in football is quite different both in intention and interpretation to what I assume is "the eye area" [to which you're referring] in rugby. To be fair to football, there's never been a problem with eye gouging. I'm happy to see fairly heavy punishments for offences for it.
Being scared of Beattie senior is an entirely acceptable mindset. I let the air out of his son a wee bit late about 12 years ago when he was an up and commer playing for Glasgow Accies and I was a grizzled old 6 playing for Dundee High in a meaningless cup game. Senior was less than pleased and conveyed this sentiment from pitchside. I made a point of standing in a group of players in the bar until they left, I SWEAR he was glaring at me.
Has he been working with Joe Marler?
Babysteps...
@duckman if you can call someone an English B*****d on the field (as people here have said you can) then I would imagine calling someone a Jew isn't an issue either ? People can call me a Catholic or an Englishman all day long, won't bother me one jot. If you get called a B or a C so what ?
Being scared of Beattie senior is an entirely acceptable mindset.
Indeed. I recall meeting him in the Stew-Mel FP bar with Finlay Calder and realising he was a hell of a lot bigger and meaner looking in real life than on telly.
The rule for "hands to the face" in football is quite different
I understand and agree but my fear is that rugby is getting a bit too like football in the way it treats things like this.
Eye gouging is a nasty business where you deliberately stick your finger up to the knuckle into some bloke's eye socket and then wiggle it about. It deserves serious punishment.
"Making contact with the eye area" is nothing to do with gouging and it's total rubbish to ban players for things like the Ashton example. It's a contact sport with bodies flying about and collisions don't always happen how you anticipate and your hands have to go somewhere.
I'm not condoning dirty or reckless play but people get hurt by accidental things all the time - it's part of the game.
My point is - it's getting a bit like wendy-ball with all this "hands to the face" nonsense. The Ashton banning was plain ludicrous.
The rule for "hands to the face" in football is quite different both in intention and interpretation to what I assume is "the eye area" [to which you're referring] in rugby. To be fair to football, there's never been a problem with eye gouging. I'm happy to see fairly heavy punishments for offences for it.
There is simply no excuse for hands in the eye area. As for full on eye gouging then the ban should be as horrific as the action. Until you've had someone's finger nail scrape down the back of your eye socket, or the thumb of the opposition tight head, (yes Ashley Bowkett, I'm looking at you) buried in your skull, then the line of "it's part of the game" belongs in the "good old days" where punching and fighting was acceptable.
Player welfare should take the priority over "a bit of niggle". I still can't focus my right eye properly.
understand and agree but my fear is that rugby is getting a bit too like football in the way it treats things like this.
If anything, rugby is harsher in retrospectively punishing this kind of stuff. See for example Fellaini's elbow in the recent Europa league game against Liverpool. Anyone could see that it was at least reckless if not intentional yet he got away with it. (I nearly wrote "Scot-Free" there... 😀 ). Yes, it's a rough tough contact sport, but players have responsibility for their opponents as well as themselves. I agree that citing can be frustrating and inconsistent at times but for the most part, it does a reasonable job (all IMO of course).
Whilst there's no excuse for eye gouging there are plenty of excuses for accidentally sticking your finger (or anything else) in a bloke's eye.
I went to tackle a guy from behind in a school game with the intent of wrapping him around the shoulders to prevent him offloading the ball. At the same time he slipped trying to sidestep another tackler so I ended up grabbing him round the head and he then tried twisting out of it so my fingers raked across his face, hurting his eye. I felt really bad and apologised. Luckily my old boy was on the sidelines and he's an eye surgeon so he checked the kid out and he was fine.
It's a fine line perhaps but it's a physical game and "enforcers" should still have their place.
"Making contact with the eye area" is nothing to do with gouging and it's total rubbish to ban players for things like the [s]Ashton[/s] Francis example. It's a contact sport with bodies flying about and collisions don't always happen how you anticipate and your hands have to go somewhere.
Ashton on the other hand deserved his ban as using the eye socket to turn the man, and in conjunction with a neck roll, is neither acceptable nor excusable. What's wrong with a finger up the nose or in the mouth to aid turning? Just like the good old days. 👿
In other news Gatland has apologised for using the term banter. 🙄
But Lee himself said:
"I personally believe the comments to have been intended as banter and accepted Joe's apology."
Bearing in mind the injury to A Quinnell (younger,could be Craig?)who lost an eye I would rather the disciplinary committee erred on the side of caution. I have been gouged (albeit not as badly as it could have been,or is described above) and it is hideous.Like polyester,some things are better left way back in the past. Somebody is going to be paralysed by a neck roll as well.
Marler let off for being a punchy cheat.
Unimpressed.
Hoping for a ban for being a racist cheat.
Gatland forced into a public apology for the offense he caused in attempting to "down play" the incident.
How long before he's cited and charged?
😉
Must have been some chuffing good biscuits.
Nothing for being racist. Nothing for a clear, premeditated punch.
Really poor decisions, setting a really bad example.
He's a lucky boy. I guess Lee's subsequent comments helped. Well, as I said previously, the citing system does a good job [b][i]most[/b][/i] of the time. 😀
It was a forearm smash not a punch.
How the hell did he get away with that? He's a lucky boy. The elbow / punch didn't look like a red card offence, but a yellow for me.
The ban for Francis seems fair. Ashton's tackle with hands over the eyes was ridiculous...grabbing someone around the head was never going to end well, plus he's got form for being involved in silly stuff like that. From what I understand Francis has a good record which was no doubt part of the reason why his ban was less. Hope it doesn't impact on Exeter too much.
So a forearm smash to the face of an opponent is just dandy, then?
That's the lesser problem though. Rugby has just said racism is OK I it's in the heart of the moment apparently. Very disappointed.
Didn't hit him in the face though did he?
No he didn't! He strunk him with his elbow. Look at where his elbow stops. It was nowhere near his face.
Stop defending the punchy racist.
Deserved a yellow for that, and a big ban (4 weeks starting tarrif ) for racism. Heat of the moment is no excuse.
Piss off. Just because you're salty at getting beaten, stop deflecting with faux offense. Lee wasn't offended but you are outraged? A bloke gets a pretty pathetic elbow to the chest and you're calling for citings?
I'm not sure rugby is for you.
Nothing to do with being beaten off the park by a better team on the day, and only remembering to play for about ten minutes.
No need to resort of telling me to piss off, thanks.
Didn't hit him in the face though did he?
What do you reckon he was trying to do (if you've watched O'Flashearty's linked vine)?
EDIT: I see you've already kinda answered that.
As for "heat of the moment" regarding his "gypsy" comment - not a great excuse. Don't all these things happen in the "heat of the moment"?
Stop defending the punchy racist.
Deserved a yellow for that, and a big ban (4 weeks starting tarrif ) for racism. Heat of the moment is no excuse.
4 weeks isn't a big ban though is it? I'm surprised he didn't get ban mainly because of the stink that's been kicked up by MP's, campaigners etc. What was said by Lee must have been taken into account.
Marler will likely get a ban, and I'm certainly not going to cry about it. I made my view pretty clear earlier on the thread, I don't think it's racist but I do think it was inappropriate. What irks is the faux outrage by (weirdly enough) welsh fans when the man himself wasn't bothered. It's just deflection to ease the pain of a loss. Sledging happens in rugby. A player was recently fined for calling someone "faggot". Marler will get what's coming to him but that elbow was pathetic.
I'm not sure either of his actions are particularly defendable. Both are brain dead, both are in the heat of the moment, but that doesn't make it excusable.
The whole name calling thing is getting blown up too much, Gatland for his credit tried to defuse it and has been dragged into it. They need to act, issue him with a suitable ban and possibly some work within the community.
One of the reasons rugby is a great game is it's efforts at ridding foul and cynical play, that must continue.
It's just deflection to ease the pain of a loss
No. It's not. It's really not. It's about wanting rugby to retain the high standards which make it the sport it is.
Marler will get what's coming to him but that elbow was pathetic.
I was pretty sure he's getting nothing at all.
A player was recently fined for calling someone "faggot".
If you're referring to Poitgetier (sp?), funnily enough, he used the "heat of the moment excuse" as well. AU$10000 fine and another 10000 suspended but not match ban. Maybe Marler was taking notes?
DD has it , no sanction for either incident .
He can play on Saturday .
Capt, you cannot really be that wounded by this. It's pathetic. It's a long, long way from the biggest travesty in rugby. It's a long was from the biggest travesty in rugby this year.
Now excuse me gentlemen, my [i]little angel[/i] had me up at 0500hrs (which might explain my somewhat grouchy outlook) so I'm off to put myself to bed.
Racism has no place in sport. That you choose to disagree is up to you. Wrong, but up to you.
Except it's not racism (IMHO).
Your HO is wrong.
Nope
Gatts and Lee are two lucky boys getting away with such an irresponsible use of the term banter. What is rugby coming to. The players sorted it out among themselves at half time. Appalling behaviour
Wouldn't only a red card offence be a ban? The citing officer judged Marlers hit to be a pen/poss yellow only, so no further action.
For the gypsy comment, I'm surprised an example wasn't made. I imagine Lee's statement made a big difference.
I imagine Lee's statement made a big difference.
Given that the 'victim' has effectively said "we sorted it out like adults, but thanks for your concern", I would suspect so.
While far from a perfect outcome, I do think it's preferable to an alternative where Lee whined about it in the press for days and a huge ban was handed out to someone who tried to rectify the issue as soon as he realised there was a problem. You don't need a sledgehammer to crack every walnut...
The fact it was potentially racist has been highlighted. In immediately apologising and also being reprimanded by his management, it has also been dealt with quickly and effectively. The potential penalty for any future racist offence has been highlighted as a deterrent.
Just wheel out the chippy loser defence Wrecker! Oh hang on;you did.
Lee wouldnt whine about it in the press as he never ever speaks to them. What concerns me is that he would say he's not bothered just to continue his quiet life.
As for the elbow what pisses me off is its an obvious elbow seen by many at the time and missed by the blind idiot who was the video ref. It should have seen Marler binned. Cole should have been awarded the try and then have it removed due to Marler being a **** and had him sent to have 10 mins rest.
How Francis only got a pen against him given the discussions between the video ref and ref is a mystery too.
Wrecker you let yourself down there.
Amazed he got away with the forearm, prone player and seemed to be unprovoked. If you are now allowed to do that then and it appears you are then the game is going badly wrong.
It'll be joubert. I'll wager he's been told to look at things carefully and err on the side of caution if in doubt review it later when someone can hold his hand through complicated bits. Was pretty much the pattern through the game.
Punch was pathetic just means French front row know who to niggle to get a reaction.
I do think it's preferable to an alternative where Lee whined about it in the press for days and a huge ban was handed out to someone who tried to rectify the issue
Is this not just classic victim blaming a bit like dont rock the boat about drugs in cycling or you shouldnt wear short skirts or its just banter?
Had a welsh player said hey black boy to Itoje they would have been rightly punished. It says a lot about Marler that the question of ethnicity was at the front of his mind. If I was brave enough to try and get Lee to lamp me I'd call him a fat **** because I am slightly fatist
Had a welsh player said hey black boy to Itoje they would have been rightly punished.
There is a massive difference between being racially abused and being abused due to a lifestyle, or did I miss the bit about traveller history where they were sold into slavery, murdered, burned and segregated, and in some cases still are now?
Sorry but there is a world of difference between the two, like really huge.
due to a lifestyle
Ooops.
or did I miss the bit about traveller history where they were sold into slavery, murdered, burned and segregated, and in some cases still are now?
As someone who seems to come across normally as intelligent and balanced, I think you need to reassess what constitutes race.
or did I miss the bit about traveller history where they were sold into slavery, murdered, burned and segregated, and in some cases still are now?
You might want to look at what happened to the Romany community in Europe in the 2nd World War....
Oh well, 172 pages of rugby banter don't let it end up like every other thread on stw.
What tyres for ism's and crap punches on a rugby pitch!!
I think the disciplinary discussion about Marler went something like "c'mon chaps there's a Grand Slam on dontcha know... when will be the next time they get a chance..... and do we even know who the replacement is... best sort this from around 10pm on Saturday... if at all"
Punch was pathetic just means French front row know who to niggle to get a reaction.
This was my first thought too. If we see them get punished for similar things then can we officially rename "New Zealand rules" 😉
A quick Wiki suggests that there are 800,000 Romani in Brazil, BRAZIL?
"c'mon chaps there's a Grand Slam on dontcha know... when will be the next time they get a chance..... and do we even know who the replacement is... best sort this from around 10pm on Saturday... if at all. Now, are there any more of those spiffing biscuits?"
You missed a bit.
Did he treat the panel to some of these?
https://www.fortnumandmason.com/products/peter-rabbit-biscuit-card?taxon_id=817
I do think saying it's OK cos it was in the heat of the moment is an odd reason for not sanctioning.
Anyway, anyone else disappointed that Gatland hasn't taken the chance to bring more young players in for the Italy game? The next World Cup is just around the corner.....
For the record we are not talking about Romany here.
I do think saying it's OK cos it was in the heat of the moment is an odd reason for not sanctioning.
To be fair, we've all ****ted somebody and followed it up with a bit of ethnic abuse in the heat of the moment.
Is this not just classic victim blaming
No, it's classic A_A can't quite bring himself to agree with me.
Sure, he definitely shouldn't have said it. He apologised at the earliest opportunity, and was also bollocked by his boss for it. The apology was accepted. What's the point of punitive action if the matter is already resolved?
Have you never ever said anything you later regretted?
Sure, he definitely shouldn't have said it. He apologised at the earliest opportunity, and was also bollocked by his boss for it. The apology was accepted. What's the point of punitive action if the matter is already resolved?Have you never ever said anything you later regretted?
Yeas, but the press and 'campaigners' need something to latch on and create a massive storm. It wasn't big and clever, but it appears to have been resolved like adults which was enough for the powers that be. Time to move on?
At this point can we quote from Snatch? 😆