National League Rugby Discussion Forums Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > League Rugby - www.leaguerugby.co.uk > The Championship
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Citings
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

IMPORTANT Remember to read the rules of the board and abide by them when posting.

Topic ClosedCitings

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
gerg_861 View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner
Avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Location: Ealing
Status: Offline
Points: 813
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Nov 2019 at 06:09
Originally posted by OldNick OldNick wrote:

Originally posted by No 7 No 7 wrote:

2. A Club participating in a match may refer any incidents in the match to the Citing
Commissioner that they want him/her to consider, within the timescales set out
below:


Agreed.
They may refer to the CC.
They may not cite.

The CC must consider whether or not to cite.


What does Corporal Carrot have to do with this?
Back to Top
Guinness John View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner
Avatar

Joined: 21 May 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1143
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Nov 2019 at 09:15
A one match ban sets a really interesting benchmark for the future. I see it as a cop out. The fact that Temm was not badly injured seems to have been a mitigating factor. He could have had a broken neck just as easily.
Bedford Blues Supporter of the Year 2010 - 2011
Back to Top
Pappashanga View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner
Avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2014
Location: Surrey
Status: Offline
Points: 1778
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Nov 2019 at 09:44
Yes i agree. It's a matter of sheer chance that the result of the foul play was not serious. Surely the offence should be judged by what it is, not by the lucky consequences.
The wording of the judgment seems to me to very careful to minimise what happened. Yes we know the referee and co saw it, but the video is the key.
Possibly favouring a well known player?
pappashanga
Back to Top
islander View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner


Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Location: jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 4606
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Nov 2019 at 09:58
Back to Top
corporalcarrot View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner
Avatar

Joined: 22 Sep 2013
Location: St Ouen
Status: Offline
Points: 3288
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Nov 2019 at 10:46
Originally posted by gerg_861 gerg_861 wrote:

Originally posted by OldNick OldNick wrote:

Originally posted by No 7 No 7 wrote:

2. A Club participating in a match may refer any incidents in the match to the Citing
Commissioner that they want him/her to consider, within the timescales set out
below:


Agreed.
They may refer to the CC.
They may not cite.

The CC must consider whether or not to cite.


What does Corporal Carrot have to do with this?
Nowt to do with me I deny everything including incitement to chain the villain to the rocks at low tide so the crabs can get him!
Dont kick it. Pick it up and GO FORWARD.
Back to Top
gerg_861 View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner
Avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Location: Ealing
Status: Offline
Points: 813
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Nov 2019 at 16:10
Originally posted by islander islander wrote:

Flood verdict, with link to full judgement: 


That judgement stinks, and I would argue that the logic is faulty. They cite a previous judgement as precedent to say that not all contact with the head or neck is definitely a mid-range entry point. However, they then follow that up not by claiming that the contact was incidental, but by stating that the contact with the head was actually with the ground consequential with being rolled out of the ruck. That makes no sense.

By that logic, I could pick someone up by the legs and tombstone piledriver their head into the ground, and that wouldn't require a mid-range entry point because the contact with the head was consequential to me driving him into the ground.
Back to Top
Pappashanga View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner
Avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2014
Location: Surrey
Status: Offline
Points: 1778
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Nov 2019 at 16:33
I agree. Could have been written by his mother.
pappashanga
Back to Top
Cricks at 2 View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner


Joined: 08 Dec 2015
Location: Bedford
Status: Offline
Points: 388
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Nov 2019 at 09:16
Originally posted by gerg_861 gerg_861 wrote:

Originally posted by islander islander wrote:

Flood verdict, with link to full judgement: 



That judgement stinks, and I would argue that the logic is faulty. They cite a previous judgement as precedent to say that not all contact with the head or neck is definitely a mid-range entry point. However, they then follow that up not by claiming that the contact was incidental, but by stating that the contact with the head was actually with the ground consequential with being rolled out of the ruck. That makes no sense.

By that logic, I could pick someone up by the legs and tombstone piledriver their head into the ground, and that wouldn't require a mid-range entry point because the contact with the head was consequential to me driving him into the ground.
Totally agree, by using a precedent does that enable this ruling as another precedent for future citing? In that case, it is open season on dangerous play, with lesser consequences. Another team getting a six match player ban for the same offence, should rightly be hacked off.
Back to Top
KnightsBoy View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner
Avatar

Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Location: Doncaster
Status: Offline
Points: 1688
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Nov 2019 at 09:30
Looks to me like big club bias, it stinks.
Back to Top
Bluesman11 View Drop Down
World Cup Winner
World Cup Winner


Joined: 13 May 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 782
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Nov 2019 at 09:36
Also can’t comprehend why the forearm smash wasn’t cited or referred to in that citing. I think that one was worse and a more obvious red. He also seems to be mitigated by the fact the TMO saw it and did nothing. Not sure why David Grashoff’s complete incompetence is a mitigating factor. Another mitigating factor seems to be he is an experienced international. Again, I don’t understand why that matters. If say Lewis Robling had done the same thing would he be punished more harshly because he hasn’t played for his country?
Championship Prediction League Winner 11/12
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.