are the IRB nuts ?

[gel]

It was a pissing contest from the 5th post onwards. Thoroughly predictable, and confirms this place's reputation.

The internet?

 

[No4918]

It was a pissing contest from the 5th post onwards. Thoroughly predictable, and confirms this place's reputation.

Now who is trolling? You know where the door is.

 

[cyclopath]

It was a pissing contest from the 5th post onwards. Thoroughly predictable, and confirms this place's reputation.

Reputation? Where? On the Fern? Sportal? Planet Rugby? I'm touched you can drag yourself on here to participate if it's so heinously disreputable.

 

[Da Munch]

Didn't we go through this during super rugby? From my shite memory the Highlanders got away with spearing the Tahs two times and the next week an Aussie got weeks for doing the same thing. That's the problem with writing "Just wait until this happens to an All Black and we will see if you have the same opinion." cause it won't happen.

 

[cyclopath]

Didn't we go through this during super rugby? From my shite memory the Highlanders got away with spearing the Tahs two times and the next week an Aussie got weeks for doing the same thing. That's the problem with writing "Just wait until this happens to an All Black and we will see if you have the same opinion." cause it won't happen.

Dunno about that. Judicial lotto has no bounds.

 

[Sidbarret]

This has nothing to do with nationality on my part, if an AB tip tackles somebody, I expect the book to be thrown at them, just like here. Kurudrani tried to reverse it after he'd put him vertical and his head was on the ground. Come on..

I am the only one that sees the irony at having a pop at the IRB, by comparing a sentence to a tip tackle, to a sentence to a stiff arm?

There have been plenty of tip tackles to compare to. But charger chose to compare to whatever AB indiscretion he cld think of.

Kearns wld say I'm like a seagull on a chip - this ones got sauce on it

I actually think all acts of foul play can and should "compared".

We all watch a hell of a lot of rugby, most of play or played the game and have pretty good idea of what is illegal, dangerous or thuggish. We might disagree how bad any single act is (king hit or stiff arm being a case in point, but we will generally agree that some acts are more worthy of punishment than others. According to the punishment meted out, the message is that Kuridrani and Hore's actions were equally worthy of punishment (ignoring for a moment that Hore's punishment was effectively one match because the warm-ups he wasn't going to play in were counted, yet another fuck-up by the judiciary).

Remember the judiciary has only one "currency" that it applies to all acts of foul play. Each action is given a certain number of weeks, ergo if two actions are weighed equally, they are considered to be roughly equal.

Comparing ones reaction to the two incidents is very valid under the circumstances. If you feel what Kuridrani's action were equal to what Hore did, then fine, argue that.

 

[MajorlyRagerly]

From my shite memory .

Well, at least your post isn't entirely full of shit.

This thread is ruined and I think it's partially my fault. Put the turd out of its misery I say.

As a final thought on it, I wonder if I'm the only one who thinks Cyclopaths avatar looks like a vagina.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Well, at least your post isn't entirely full of shit.

This thread is ruined and I think it's partially my fault. Put the turd out of its misery I say.

As a final thought on it, I wonder if I'm the only one who thinks Cyclopaths avatar looks like a vagina.

Despite my threat to post nothing until Sunday on this topic - look at the title of the thread.
Sure the first post was about Kuridrani but the issue posed by the title is a much wider one justifying reference to incidents that have been treated differently, in the eyes of the posters, over the years.
Perhaps the IRB have lucid intervals -- though no one has identified one!
I havent seen a post in this thread that doesnt shed some light on the question of wether the IRB are nuts - and that's the topic.

 

[Quick Hands]

In summary, most people think the 5 week suspension is about right for the offence. The process by which the IRB reached 5 weeks is strange. The IRB are nuts and this is just another manifestation of that. ("Yes 9" at the scrum feed, referee coaching and appointments, lack of support for pacific island nations, etc.)

By the way SANZAR aren't much better when it comes to consistency, in fact the whole rugby judicial process is a dog's breakfast. You're never going to get everything right, because each incident is unique, but we're a long long way from having a process which provides players, coaches and supporters with any sort of confidence.

 

[Dan54]

[quote="MajorlyRagerly, post: 554853, member: 1813"

As a final thought on it, I wonder if I'm the only one who thinks Cyclopaths avatar looks like a vagina.[/quote]
No you not only one who thinks that MJ, I still have trouble reading his posts because of it

 

[cyclopath]

You two have led interesting lives if they look like that. I can suggest some cream that might help.

 

[swingpass]

You two have led interesting lives if they look like that. I can suggest some cream that might help.

if the vaginas they have seen are like your avatar i suggest the women need the cream !

 

[nugget]

if the vaginas they have seen are like your avatar i suggest the women need the cream !

too much L&P can do that to a woman

 

[swingpass]

the point of my original post was in fact two fold.

firstly i was really surprised at the length of the ban in this particular event, even given the crackdown on "tip tackles"

second, to highlight the disparity in the length of the ban relative to other penalties for similar offences (tackles) and in relation to episodes of foul and dangerous play in general. the judicial process whilst having a semblance of structure is in practice completely ad hoc and arbitrary.

i have been interested and surprised by some of the views expressed, notwithstanding the "pissing contest" and trolling, explicit and inadvertent.
clearly most people think 4 - 5 weeks is an appropriate sanction for this particular tackle, i didn't, but i have come round to see that viewpoint.

quick hands observation above is valid, the IRB do seem to make some really nutty decisions, but are truly top line administrators compared to the ICC !

 

[Quick Hands]

the point of my original post was in fact two fold.

firstly i was really surprised at the length of the ban in this particular event, even given the crackdown on "tip tackles"

second, to highlight the disparity in the length of the ban relative to other penalties for similar offences (tackles) and in relation to episodes of foul and dangerous play in general. the judicial process whilst having a semblance of structure is in practice completely ad hoc and arbitrary.

i have been interested and surprised by some of the views expressed, notwithstanding the "pissing contest" and trolling, explicit and inadvertent.
clearly most people think 4 - 5 weeks is an appropriate sanction for this particular tackle, i didn't, but i have come round to see that viewpoint.

quick hands observation above is valid, the IRB do seem to make some really nutty decisions, but are truly top line administrators compared to the ICC !

Although at least the ICC have some excuse. India will sabotage any decision which with they disagree, which leads to decision making paralysis or taking decisions which everyone else knows to be wrong.

The IRB are just plain nuts. Are George Clancy and Glenn Jackson really among the 9 best referees in world rugby? The IRB thinks so.

 

[Braveheart81]

As a final thought on it, I wonder if I'm the only one who thinks Cyclopaths avatar looks like a vagina.

No you not only one who thinks that MJ, I still have trouble reading his posts because of it

Have people really not seen Lord of the Rings?

Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk

 

[p.Tah]

The IRB's nuts, vaginas, STDs and now Lord of the Rings. This thread went South pretty quickly.

 

[boyo]

Ring of fire?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

The various judiciaries in Rugbydom are generally guided by IRB regulation 17 in terms of illegal and foul play and/or misconduct. http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/0/regulation17a4_874.pdf

It is possible to compare sentences and punishments handed out for different citings on the basis of the guidance in that document.

Extract from IRB Reg 17:
Judiciary Entry Point Based on Scale of Seriousness of the Player’s conduct, which constitutes the offending.
Law No.6.A.5, 10.4(k) Verbal Abuse of Match Officials,
Lower End 6 weeks, Mid Range 12 weeks, Top End 18+weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No.6.A.5, 10.4(k) Physical Abuse of Match Officials
Lower End 24 weeks, Mid Range 48 weeks, Top End 96+ weeks, Maximum Sanction Life

Law No.6.A.5, 10.4(k) Threatening Actions or Words at Match Officials
Lower End 12 weeks, Mid Range 24 weeks, Top End 48+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 260 weeks

Law No.10.4(a) Striking another Player with a hand, arm or fist
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 5 weeks, Top End 8+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(a) Striking another Player with the elbow
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 5 weeks, Top End 9+ weeks,Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(a) Striking with knee
Lower End 3 weeks, Mid Range 8 weeks, Top End 12+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(a) Striking with head
Lower End 4 weeks, Mid Range 8 weeks, Top End 12+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 104 weeks

Law No 10.4(b) Stamping on an Opponent
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 5 weeks, Top End 9+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(b) Trampling on an Opponent
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 5 weeks, Top End 9+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(c) Kicking an Opponent
Lower End 4 weeks, Mid Range 8 weeks, Top End 12+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(d) Tripping an Opponent with the foot/leg
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 4 weeks, Top End 7+weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(e) Dangerous tackling of an Opponent including early or late and including the action known as the “stiff arm tackle”
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 6 weeks, Top End 10+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(f) Holding, pushing or obstructing an Opponent not holding the ball except in a scrum, ruck or maul
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 4 weeks, Top End 6+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(f) Dangerous charging or obstructing or grabbing of Opponent without the ball, including shouldering
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 5 weeks, Top End 9+weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(g) Dangerous charging or obstructing or grabbing of Opponent with the ball, including shouldering
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 5 weeks, Top End 9+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(i) Causing a scrum, ruck or maul to collapse
Lower End 2 weeks, Mid Range 4 weeks, Top End 8+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(k) Testicle grabbing or twisting or squeezing
Lower End 12 weeks, Mid Range 18 weeks, Top End 24+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 208 weeks

Law No 10.4(k) Biting
Lower End 12 weeks, Mid Range 18 weeks, Top End 24+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 208 weeks

Law No 10.4(k) Contact with Eyes or the Eye Area
Lower End 12 weeks, Mid Range 18 weeks, Top End 24+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 156 weeks

Law No 10.4(k) Spitting at Players
Lower End 4 weeks, Mid Range 7 weeks, Top End 11+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

Law No 10.4(k) Verbal abuse of Players based on Religion, Race, Colour, or National or Ethnic Origin or otherwise
Lower End 4 weeks, Mid Range 8 weeks, Top End 13+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

 

[Slim 293]

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned anywhere..........

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ces-the-fight-of-his-life-20140331-35u3y.html