• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Byrnes gets 10 Weeks

Status
Not open for further replies.
meatsack

meatsack

Ward Prentice (10)
Some footage, from Fox sports.

I don't have a horse in the race, it was careless and there was a gap in the footage so can't be a 100% sure either way, but initial impression wasn't a gouge.

That said, a scratch on an eye can hurt like hell! Thing is, when I get a scratch I'm blinking all over the place, TC got up, scored a try and then complained. Not saying it didn't happen but maybe I'm not giving him enough credit.
 
F

Full Credit

Guest
I can only imagine he got the 2 week discount because it was on Tom Carter.
In all seriousness, I have no time for this sort of cheap shit. It's about as low a dog act as one can do on a field. Regardless of the fact the footage is inconclusive of contact with the eyes, he shouldn't have been grappling him around the head to begin with and his fingers should be nowhere near another players eyes.
 
Scoey

Scoey

Tony Shaw (54)
Torn Hammy said:
I saw a replay of Byrnes with his hand on Carter's face. Didn't look good.
Click to expand...

Not singling you out Hammy, but there's been a few posts relating to hands being on Carter's face and it looking a bit off. Have a look at the copious amounts of footage from the week before of the Tom Carter face massage to Digby Ioane just before "that sledge".

If Byrnes has been rubbed out for 10 weeks, because his hand was on TC's face, then consistency requires that he cop 12 weeks less any discount for being a good boy also. His intention was not to eye gouge Digby I am sure but the way he rubs his face I think there was a far greater risk to him poking him in the eye than what the footage shows of the TC/Byrnes incident. Just sayin'...
 
Ignoto

Ignoto

Greg Davis (50)
qwerty51 said:
His Super rugby one might be ok, but I'm sure he's also had incidents in Shute Shield, they probably don't look at that but maybe they should because to say he has a good record just doesn't sound right.
Click to expand...

How far do you go back history wise? Palu's spent time in custody prior to rugby for assault, should that be taken into account? Especially considering the "roughing" up he gave Beau a couple weeks ago? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=N6zqDIDvwhg#t=541s

;)

Scoey said:
His intention was not to eye gouge Digby I am sure but the way he rubs his face I think there was a far greater risk to him poking him in the eye than what the footage shows of the TC/Byrnes incident.
Click to expand...

Touching of the head should be completely not allowed. Protection of the Brain and Eyes should be paramount in my books. There's too much that can go wrong around those areas and no player deserves a permanent irreversible injury!
 
Ignoto

Ignoto

Greg Davis (50)
qwerty51 said:
Serious? Beau is 100% at fault there and we should've got the penalty.
Click to expand...

Who cares if he was being held on, he was shoving his face. While I agree Beau was in the wrong to be holding onto Palu, it doesn't excuse the actions by Palu.

It's a pretty simple rule - Don't make contact with the head.
 
sonny crockett

sonny crockett

Allen Oxlade (6)
Ah how I yearn for the good old days. I do so remember one very good referee, a doctor and very respected citizen reffing an A grade match here, mid 80's. A particular hooker and serial pest was annoying the hell out of one of the opposite second rowers, a 130kg behemoth who had a penchant for blowing up, so we targeted him, and he often got sent off. However the ref was aware of it too. Out of a particular ruck came the big man and put a sweet straight right on the hooker's jaw, to which the referee, in his perfect English accent said, "great punch number 5, play on'.
 
R

Rugby rebel

Guest
If you actually look at the footage you will see that Byrnes' hand is flat and not curled in as one would expect for an eye gouge when it passes by the face of TC! Secondly he has his eyes closed ie he is not looking at where his hands are!
Thirdly TC does not pull his head away as one would expect if they had been ey gouged. For me that raises doubt.
Lets not forget that the footage being thrown around has been slowed down to snail speed. At normal speed it looks nowhere near as bad. Take a look of the photo on the daily tele with Alcock and Pyle under the article "The Eyes Have it for the Rebels" is that raking? Does that deserve a 10 week ban? Just have a look at how many times players touch the face or head area of other players during a game. According to the rules everyone one who touches a player's face is guilty of the same offence. Madness!
I don't think one's record has any bearing or relevance. These things happen in a fraction of a second. But for the record Byrnes's super record is clean.
 
Gagger

Gagger

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
Staff member
If we're watching the same footage, I think the core part of the incident happens out of camera.

I'm assuming their looking at the damage on Carter's eye (I believe it drew blood) and saying that doesn't happen by accident.

Should incidents only be ruled on if the camera catches it? (genuine question)

Rugby rebel said:
I don't think one's record has any bearing or relevance. These things happen in a fraction of a second. But for the record Byrnes's super record is clean.
Click to expand...

Didn't he bite someones finger a couple years back?
 
Bardon

Bardon

Peter Fenwicke (45)
qwerty51 said:
So I just heard Byrnes was suppose to get 12 weeks but got 10 for a good record? Huh? The guy is serial offender, he had a biting allegation in 2010 on Will Caldwell.
Click to expand...

It seems these days as long as you haven't murdered anyone on the field of play you're deemed to have a good diciplinary record and are therefore up for a reduction in your ban. Delon Armitage is the perfect example. He was banned 4 times last year alone but still managed to get reductions for his past good record.
 
R

Rugby rebel

Guest
"Didn't he bite someones finger a couple years back?"

The answer to that question is no.

As for the "injury to TC" have a look at the photo on the Brisbane Courier taken the day after the game under the article "Rebels Lock Banned for 10 weeks". All I see is a scratch on his nose which could have come from anywhere and anyone during the game.
 
rugbyisfun

rugbyisfun

Jimmy Flynn (14)
I think everyone is a bit naive thinking you are going to find that 'smoking gun' video clip of an eye gouge every time. Almost every rugby player will tell you they could have very easily 'gone for the quick gouge or scrape' many a time and no one would have been the wiser in that particular ruck or maul (aside from the recipient of said gouge). I'm backing the fact that Byrnes knew what he was doing , got his fingers in there and had a good rip around and got out and some damage has been done. For those questioning whether it's worth 10 weeks, get your mate to sneak up behind you and work today, get you in a headlock and start poking and prodding near and around your eyes, whilst imagining the damage that could be done if the assailant actually wanted to rip his nails into your eyeball....
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
rugbyisfun said:
For those questioning whether it's worth 10 weeks, get your mate to sneak up behind you and work today, get you in a headlock and start poking and prodding near and around your eyes, whilst imagining the damage that could be done if the assailant actually wanted to rip his nails into your eyeball....
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that if I eye gouged a colleague at work today, I'd get more than a 10 week punishment.
 
R

Rugby rebel

Guest
"I'm backing the fact that Byrnes knew what he was doing , got his fingers in there and had a good rip around and got out and some damage has been done. For those questioning whether it's worth 10 weeks, get your mate to sneak up behind you and work today, get you in a headlock and start poking and prodding near and around your eyes"

Sorry I think people are missing the point here. The facts are TC took Byrnes out off the ball. Which in itself is illegal. This business of someone sneaking up behind someone and grabbing them in a head lock is I am afraid completely wrong. So is the statement that he "had a good rip around". I think people need to compare this incident if in fact it is an incident with real cases of eye gouging.

One more thing lets not forget that the charge brought against Byrnes is not for eye gouging.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom