How long will Quade get?

[emuarse]

What bemuses me is that the judiciary will make a decision within 24 hours of now, but that this thread will be still at it in a week's time.

 

[Dam0]

I don't think that is a red card offence and so he should not even get cited. I think he'll get off with just the Yellow.

 

[Richo]

Let's not beat around the bush people. If Barnes were a boxer he would have been retired years ago for his glass jaw, you see it in boxing and ufc consistently, whatever the reason some blokes are physiologically just more susceptible to been knocked out when hit in certain places in the head

Not to overstate the obvious, but this happens to be rugby, not boxing or UFC. If a player has a history of head knocks it doesn't mean you should get off lightly for knocking the bloke out.

 

[fatprop]

The question is, is it a red card offence? Dangerous tackle's above the shoulder are minimum yellow, and sometimes red.

I can't really decide. If Berrick wasn't injured by the tackle, and it had no impact on the game. Quade can probably argue that it was a yellow card offence, or a very low grade red card offence. It doesn't look entirely intentional, but probably reckless. So 1 week might be a good bet.

I struggle with the concept of injury being the reason for sanction, Barnes may dropped into it, but that changed the contact area from the throat to the jaw.

The tackle was too high, simple

 

[Ruggo]

Not to overstate the obvious, but this happens to be rugby, not boxing or UFC. If a player has a history of head knocks it doesn't mean you should get off lightly for knocking the bloke out.

I think we are getting two different issues combined. A player with a history of headknocks should consider how important rugby is in the bigger scheme of things aka Elton Flatley. Rugby is a contact sport and the worse could happen through the course of the game within the laws or as we did see last night through a pure accident. This is where I take issue with these sorts of incidents and how they are punnished. The intent and not the result of the incident must be the focus. It is the sole reason for the inconsistancy we see in the judiciary. Look at the differences in suspension between Digby and Horne earlier in the year for similar incidents all because of the the different reactions of the victim. I guess Horne got lucky because his victim got straight back into the game.

The way Quade and Barnes were talking after the game would give fair reason to believe there was no malice in the incident.

 

[qwerty51]

Horne got off lighter because he had a clean record. Digby and Quade do not.

 

[liquor box]

Not to overstate the obvious, but this happens to be rugby, not boxing or UFC. If a player has a history of head knocks it doesn't mean you should get off lightly for knocking the bloke out.

but you should only be suspended for the offence, not what happened due to the incident. If Barnes was decapitated and died on the field then the penalty should be the same as if he took it on the chin and kept on running. The point of contact is the only thing that is important

 

[#1 Tah]

Cannot believe the memories of the people that say Quade is clean. He will be lucky to get one week, I predict two.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Look at around 23 seconds..BB is basically in a full squat. His thigh is parallel to the ground at impact. That's more than a "dip" into the tackle.

2 weeks

Dangerous tackling of an Opponent
including a tackle or attempted tackle
above the line of the shoulders even if the
tackle starts below the line of the
shoulders
LE – 2 weeks
MR – 6 weeks
TE – 10+ w
http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/regulations/04/23/19/120531gfirbhandbook2012freg17eng.pdf

Assessment:

(a) whether the offending was intentional or deliberate;
(b) whether the offending was reckless, that is the Player knew (or should have
known) there was a risk of committing an act of Foul Play;
(c) the gravity of the Player’s actions in relation to the offending;
(d) the nature of the actions, the manner in which the offence was committed
including part of body used (for example, fist, elbow, knee or boot);
(e) the existence of provocation;
(f) whether the Player acted in retaliation and the timing of such;
(g) whether the Player acted in self-defence (that is whether he used a reasonable
degree of force in defending himself);
(h) the effect of the Player’s actions on the victim (for example, extent of injury,
removal of victim Player from the game);
(i) the effect of the Player’s actions on the Match;
(j) the vulnerability of the victim Player including part of victim’s body
involved/affected, position of the victim Player, ability to defend himself;
(k) the level of participation in the offending and level of premeditation;
(l) whether the conduct of the offending Player was completed or amounted to an
attempt; and
(m) any other feature of the Player’s conduct in relation to or connected with the
offending.

Then they take account of aggravating factors and mitigating factors: QC (Quade Cooper)'s would be evenly balanced (at best).
Aggravating factors:

(a) the Player’s status generally as an offender of the Laws of the Game;
4

(b) the need for a deterrent to combat a pattern of offending in the Game; and
(c) any other off-field aggravating factor(s) that the Disciplinary Committee or
Judicial Officer considers relevant and appropria

Mitigating:

(a) the presence and timing of an acknowledgement of culpability/wrong-doing by the
offending Player;
(b) the Player’s disciplinary record and/or good character;
(c) the youth and inexperience of the Player;
(d) the Player’s conduct prior to and at the hearing;
(e) the Player having demonstrated remorse for his conduct to the victim Player
including the timing of such remorse; and
(f) any other off-field mitigating factor(s) that the Disciplinary Committee or Judicial
Officer considers relevant and appropriate.

 

[Scott Allen]

Having watched the footage frame by frame there is no doubt the point of contact using the shoulder was the jaw. The photo posted earlier showing the arm across the shoulder was well after the point of contact.

Think IS is about right at two weeks but would not surprise me if it's more given that they take into account effect on Barnes as per (h) above.

 

[vidiot]

It will be ironic if QC (Quade Cooper) misses the Rugby Championship not because of fitness or poor form but because he is still suspended for his tackling.

 

[TOCC]

Not to overstate the obvious, but this happens to be rugby, not boxing or UFC. If a player has a history of head knocks it doesn't mean you should get off lightly for knocking the bloke out.

Yes I'm well aware, my posts were in reply to those on the previous page who were talking about Barnes history with head knocks..

The fact that Barnes was taken off shouldn't be an influencing factor due to the the fact that some players are more susceptible to been knocked out/concussed and barnes is one of those.. If its a head high, its a head high.. Whether the player got up and walked off or was removed from the ground on a stretcher should come into the equation.. But no doubt it will

 

[Inside Shoulder]

But no doubt it will

No - it does because the regulations say it does.
QC (Quade Cooper) should pick his targets more carefully.

 

[emuarse]

I struggle with the concept of injury being the reason for sanction, Barnes may dropped into it, but that changed the contact area from the throat to the jaw.

The tackle was too high, simple

That is where you are totally wrong. His arm/hand never went above the top of the shoulder.

 

[cyclopath]

That is where you are totally wrong. His arm/hand never went above the top of the shoulder.
View attachment 2574

Must have a "glass shoulder" then I guess.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

That is where you are totally wrong. His arm/hand never went above the top of the shoulder.
View attachment 2574

His arm is above the shoulder in the picture you included in your post: it is irrelevant how or when it get there.

10.4 (e) A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders even
if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. A tackle around the opponent’s neck or
head is dangerous play.

 

[kiap]

A still of the QC (Quade Cooper) tackle on BB.

Looks like Barnes dropped height going into the tackle, but whether Cooper had committed to it (or not) before that happened might be material to the outcome.

The judicial hearing, to be held by Paul Tully via video conference, will be at 2pm (AEST) on Monday.

 

[Slim 293]

This still frame clearly shows Quade's arm never went above Barnes' feet.......

Oh shit.......

 

[kiap]

Oh shit...

Good to see you've bounced back from that high shot yesterday, Slim.

 

[Slim 293]

But, if I take this one photo:

It not only proves that the tackle wasn't high, but Quade is nowhere to be seen!