Giteau on Du Preez
- Thread starter Moses
- Start date
- Status
Ash
Michael Lynagh (62)
Agreed on Giteau getting off lightly - I voted for a week's suspension. He got off way too lightly - the international citing system (just like the Super 14 one) is an inconsistent joke. One area where the (NRL) leaguies have it over union in spades.
And on that note - suspending for "weeks" is also a joke. It should be "games". Hooray for token suspensions at end of season stuff - how pointless. Just like the suspension of Giteau for one week - he'd be able to play the Bledisloe two weeks later, missing effectively 0 games.
And on that note - suspending for "weeks" is also a joke. It should be "games". Hooray for token suspensions at end of season stuff - how pointless. Just like the suspension of Giteau for one week - he'd be able to play the Bledisloe two weeks later, missing effectively 0 games.
Agreed it should be for games, and additionally only games for your professional club and country should count.
Otherwise you get named in Aus A vs Tonga on Friday only to be unavailable due to suspension.. suddenly you're still ready for the Wallabies on the Saturday.
Otherwise you get named in Aus A vs Tonga on Friday only to be unavailable due to suspension.. suddenly you're still ready for the Wallabies on the Saturday.
rustycruiser
Billy Sheehan (19)
I thought that was the way it worked. I recall reading that Parisse's ban for gouging was delayed until August when the Italian club season started. Whereas Burger is back in action on August 22nd, as the Currie Cup started the wekk after the Lions left, so his clock has bean running, while Parisse's hasnt.Moses said:
Newb
Trevor Allan (34)
seems we're all in agreement that there needs to be more consistency from citing commissions. but how do you actually achieve that?
i for one don't think rigid "if this-then that" systems are the way to. they never seem to allow for proper examination of the circumstances, and sometimes are circumvented anyways. like wasn't parisse's offense a grade-something-or-other offense that should have been 12 weeks minimum made 8 because he was a first time offender? and then schalk was given the 8 weeks too... and we know that story.
i think it's hard to say each gouge should be X number of weeks. and each shoulder charge should be Y number of weeks. and each spear tackle should be Z number of weeks. each instance needs to be looked at on it's own and dealt with accordingly. no, not everyone will agree with the result but that's the way judgment calls go.
does a red carry automatic citing commissions? should yellows too? and then there are the acts that receive no card or perhaps not even a penalty that should be cited.
and what's to be considered in the citing? intent? injury? history? reputation?
i think intent matters most but is often hard to prove because you can't reasonably say what a player was thinking at the time of the incident or why. identical intent could cause no injury one time and grievous injury another, which is why i don't think the result of the matter is as important. and if a player is hauled up multiple times, maybe that does mean they aren't learning their lesson.
more than anything though, it seems we need citing commissioners who can actually do more than find their own arse with a flashlight.
i for one don't think rigid "if this-then that" systems are the way to. they never seem to allow for proper examination of the circumstances, and sometimes are circumvented anyways. like wasn't parisse's offense a grade-something-or-other offense that should have been 12 weeks minimum made 8 because he was a first time offender? and then schalk was given the 8 weeks too... and we know that story.
i think it's hard to say each gouge should be X number of weeks. and each shoulder charge should be Y number of weeks. and each spear tackle should be Z number of weeks. each instance needs to be looked at on it's own and dealt with accordingly. no, not everyone will agree with the result but that's the way judgment calls go.
does a red carry automatic citing commissions? should yellows too? and then there are the acts that receive no card or perhaps not even a penalty that should be cited.
and what's to be considered in the citing? intent? injury? history? reputation?
i think intent matters most but is often hard to prove because you can't reasonably say what a player was thinking at the time of the incident or why. identical intent could cause no injury one time and grievous injury another, which is why i don't think the result of the matter is as important. and if a player is hauled up multiple times, maybe that does mean they aren't learning their lesson.
more than anything though, it seems we need citing commissioners who can actually do more than find their own arse with a flashlight.
I think a good start would be to have a citing panel, say three retired referees who get cushy retainers to watch the games each week then chat over skype. They can set the tone for all judicial matters in major internationals.
The individual comps can do their own thing, but for Super 14 I'd like to see one Aussie, one Kiwi and one Saffa on a panel.
The individual comps can do their own thing, but for Super 14 I'd like to see one Aussie, one Kiwi and one Saffa on a panel.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
Moses said:
So if he was watching du Preez why did he jump into his head? If he was watching him he would nbot have jumped becuase he would have realized that he had no chance of getting to the ball. His jump was a snap decision to go for the man when you realise you canlt make the ball. Brain explosion.
He fucked up. No excuses. Nice guy and all that yadda yadda.
- Status