Scotty
David Codey (61)
Not saying this is what happened in this case, but would you be happy if you were convicted primarily (or even solely) on the evidence of your accuser?
Byrnes gets 10 Weeks
- Thread starter rugbyisfun
- Start date
- Status
Not saying this is what happened in this case, but would you be happy if you were convicted primarily (or even solely) on the evidence of your accuser?
Scotty
David Codey (61)
If it could be proven.
L
Linebacker_41
Guest
From memory Byrnes and the Waratahs has had a number of incidents. Including a preseason game in Toowoomba where Byrnes escaped sanction (and maintained a clean record) because there was no clear footage of him punching his NSW counterpart. Then of course was the Dean Mumm bite allegation in 2010.
Is there a case of victimisation on Byrnes part from NSW or is this more a case of if you infringe often enough eventually (at pro level) the cameras will catch you out.
It would be hard for Byrnes to argue that he is being victimised.
He has done more than enough in plain sight during his career to suggest that he is more the culprit than the victim.
He has done more than enough in plain sight during his career to suggest that he is more the culprit than the victim.
suckerforred
Chilla Wilson (44)
Went looking for my previous comment on this incident but couldn't find it so it might be in another thread. From initial viewing I didn't think that there was that much in it, but thems the rules. You make contact with a players face, and there is medical evidence to prove it, you can expect to cop some punishment. I am loath to say that the punishment in this case was too much, as I am with Cyclopath is saying that the face and head should be treated a sacrosanct. If contact is made with the eye, accidential or otherwise, blindness can result and therefore should not be allowed. Last season, and this season already, there were a few incidents where players were wrestled away from rucks by their heads. This practice should also be meet with a 10 week ban.
I don't believe that there is any mention of contact being 'accidential' or not in the laws. Any allowance for 'accidential' I think has been in the 'norm' rather then the 'rule'.
It will be interesting to see how the use of the white card continues during the season and also if the consistancy is maintained.
I don't believe that there is any mention of contact being 'accidential' or not in the laws. Any allowance for 'accidential' I think has been in the 'norm' rather then the 'rule'.
It will be interesting to see how the use of the white card continues during the season and also if the consistancy is maintained.
R
Rugby rebel
Guest
Does that mean that any contact with the eye area or head or nose etc whether it be a palm off etc should result in a 10 week if not more ban.
The rules clearly state that ANY contact with the eye area, eye or face results in a 12 week ban.
The rules clearly state that ANY contact with the eye area, eye or face results in a 12 week ban.
My question was what other evidence they would take, and whether video evidence must be part of that.
In this case it would seem they relied on the doctors report to lend weight to the inconclusive vid
Scotty
David Codey (61)
I suspect the doctor could only give evidence on the nature and possible cause of the injury. Not when it occurred, or who did it?
Not trying to defend Byrnes, but it does seem strange that when there have been incidents with apparently much more conclusive video evidence to support a guilty verdict, that nothing has come of them, yet this seemingly inconclusive one gets 10 weeks.
I just wonder if the judiciary is more likely to suspend a player when the white card has been issued, than if not?
Not trying to defend Byrnes, but it does seem strange that when there have been incidents with apparently much more conclusive video evidence to support a guilty verdict, that nothing has come of them, yet this seemingly inconclusive one gets 10 weeks.
I just wonder if the judiciary is more likely to suspend a player when the white card has been issued, than if not?
W
What2040
Guest
No real evidence of gouging -
hand on face - sure
some damage from incident - sure
unless big Adam fessed up he should be given the benefit of doubt (which he hasn't)
Maybe Scotty's comment re the white card is valid
hand on face - sure
some damage from incident - sure
unless big Adam fessed up he should be given the benefit of doubt (which he hasn't)
Maybe Scotty's comment re the white card is valid
Bruwheresmycar
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Impossible to answer. I'd say it is slightly less likely that it would have been reported without the white card system in place. Is this a good thing? I think the opinion would be split 50/50. It's still early days so maybe we will have a clearer view of things 4 or 5 rounds down the track.
Forcefield
Ken Catchpole (46)
All of the last few derbies have been grubby. Nathan Sharpe isn't well known for carrying on outside of play. Whoever that was that he elbowed probably deserved it.
As for Nathan Charles, who wouldn't want to hit a Brumby? You guys are seriously annoying. Also, you probably deserved it.
ChargerWA
Mark Loane (55)
Colleague? Yes.
Competitor. I would probably be bumped up the pay scale at my work.
Shiggins
Steve Williams (59)
if I was being held at every other ruck I would elbow someone too.
Http://www.youtube.com/shiggins316
meatsack
Ward Prentice (10)
Can you find a valid reason for Tom Carters hand to be visibly pushing Digby Ioane's face into the turf after the tackle had already been completed in the first round? I think you have to consider intent and situation. I'm not calling for TC to be banned for 10 weeks because of it, and I don't think you are either, but the way you presented your case....
mark_s
Chilla Wilson (44)
The TC incident has been mis-understood by most and I was previously sworn to secrecy but its important the truth be aired given subsequent confusion on this matter.
During what TC thought was the last tackle of the game, he noticed that a funnel web spider had lodged itself on the back of Diggers head at some stage during the game. Funnel webs are pretty common here in Sydney after all and its been a wet summer. Being the conscientious man of action that he is, TC quickly decided to squash said spider as quickly as possible. This was a life threatening situation, so TC took the only action possible in that instant (after all, there was no time to run off the field and get a can of mortein) and squashed it with his hand, at some significant personal risk. Unfortunately a consequence of this quick, selfless and life saving action from TC was that Diggers face was pushed into the soft/sandy turf for the briefest of seconds.
Jubilant at his ability to help out a fellow rugby player in a time of need, TC stood up and yelled out “Take that you dirty funnel web on diggers head”. Unfortunately, this was misheard by Diggers and a number of his closeby reds teammates as being a rather crude “sledge”. This was compounded by the timing of the Reds dramatic match winning try, which took away the briefest moment that was available for everyone to realize the grave mis-understanding that had just occurred. TC plans to clear up the mis-understanding at the rematch in Brisbane.
suckerforred
Chilla Wilson (44)
He will just need to watch the toilet seats..... we have red backs.
Scoey
Tony Shaw (54)
In what rule book do you have all rights to hit someone?
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Obviously Charles is still hurting from the fact that he was handed over by the Brumbies to play over in that backwards part of the country...
3 hours behind doesn't quite sum up the mentality of the Perth lot...
- Status