James Horwill cited for stamping

[Sully]

I'd love to be there but I'm at home mate.

 

[Sully]

Horwill no sleep last night!

 

[Sully]

He feels vindicated. Thanked the irb guys for running good judiciaries.

 

[Bullrush]

As I understand it the appointments for this series were made under the IRBs 'merit-based' system (17.5). And there is a fair contradictory detail about appeals in Reg 18 re the appeals committee.

I'm not sure about the contradictory details but the IRB required merits for appointmenst seem pretty common-sense and fair:

The Chairman of the Appeal Committee or the

Appeal Officer (as the case may be) shall be a serving or retired Judge or

senior legal practitioner who has had previous experience in rugby

disciplinary matters. The Chairman of the Appeal Committee or the

Appeal Officer (as the case maybe) shall be from a neutral country unless

the Participating Unions agree otherwise. Where applicable, the persons

to be appointed as the two additional members of the Appeal Committee

may include eminent former players, eminent rugby administrators,

legally qualified persons who have had previous experience in rugby

disciplinary proceedings or other suitably qualified personnel. Where an

Appeal Committee is appointed, the two remaining members appointed by

the Host Union shall be from a neutral country unless the Participating

Unions agree otherwise. No person who is a member or a full time paid

employee of the Host Union or other affiliated organisation responsible

for the management of either team participating in a Match shall be

eligible for appointment as Chairman or member of an Appeal Committee

or as an Appeal Officer.

The Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee or Judicial

Officer (as the case may be), shall be from a neutral country

unless the Participating Unions agree otherwise.







The Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee or Judicial

Officer shall be a senior legal practitioner of at least seven years

standing or a serving or retired judge who shall have had

previous experience in rugby disciplinary proceedings. Where

a Disciplinary Committee is appointed, the remaining two

members appointed by the Host Union may include an eminent

former player, eminent rugby administrator or legally qualified

persons with previous experience in rugby disciplinary

proceedings or other suitably qualified personnel.

Is there anything in there that doesn't seem fair or looks unreasonable?

 

[p.Tah]

I've never said he stomped on 3 peoples heads.

There is footage of two incidents and he received an off-field yellow for stamping a 3rd person.

apologies Bullrush. I misinterpreted this post

Josh, if you think stamping (as Horwill has done) or even 'stepping' on someone's head is part of the game, you really don't know how to play rugby and neither does your mate.

And even if I give you Farrell's alleged one on Lucas, who was the 2nd person he's stamped on recently? This is Horwill's 3rd one. My question to you was to find someone or footage of someone who had done it 3 times with no suspension. Can't think of anyone??

 

[Swat]

Is it now time to start a #JusticeForAustralians campaign to protest the consistant choice of JOC (James O'Connor) at 10?

edit: #Dingone

 

[gel]

I am glad that the original findings were upheld.

 

[Bullrush]

apologies Bullrush. I misinterpreted this post

Thanks mate.

I started to get a bit more fired up than I intended to...probably around 4.30am this morning!!

 

[Shiggins]

I knew it. I honestly thought at the end of the day the first bloke made a decision. The second bloke has obviously looked at the evidence and said the same thing.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Some common sense reached here, I'm delighted the IRBs banana republic style court didn't reach the verdict they wanted

muhaha - maybe it did

 

[vidiot]

I'm not sure about the contradictory details

I many be reading thr wrong handbook, and this is all somewhat irrelevant now it the issue is over, though I thought that last time, but the merit based scheme means the officials aren't picked by the home union.

17.5. Merit Based Appointment Scheme

17.5.1 The merit based appointment scheme was established by Council to permit the independent appointment by the IRB of Citing Commissioners, Judicial Officers, Disciplinary Committees, Appeal Officers and Appeal Committees on a merit basis to designated Matches. The following Matches form part of the merit based appointment scheme:
(a) IRB Matches;
(b) Cross-hemisphere Summer and Autumn International Matches between the Unions forming part of the Six Nations1 and Rugby Championship2 International Tournaments; and
(c) Upon application, any other Match where the Board gives its approval for the Match to form part of the merit based appointment scheme.

17.5.2 Where the IRB makes appointments under the scheme reference to Host Union or Tournament Organiser appointments within this Regulation should be read as references to the IRB.

Appeals are dealt with in Reg 18

18.7.2 On receipt of a notice of appeal and the grounds for appeal within the time limit set out in Regulation 18.7.1, an Appeal Committee shall be appointed by the Appeal Panel Chairman or his designee. The Appeal Committee shall, ordinarily, be made up of three members of the Appeal Panel, under the Chairmanship of a senior legal practitioner who shall, subject to Regulation 18.7.3 and Appendix 2, have the discretion to regulate the procedure prior to and at any Appeal Committee hearing.

 

[Scoey]

"In light of the potential adverse implications, the IRB is keen to ensure all acts of foul play involving the head should be given serious and thorough consideration. This was recognised by the Appeal Officer in his decision."

The above quote (emphasis added by me) from the FoxSports article on this debacle.

So from this we can no doubt expect them to have a look at the Farrell incident, or A.Tuilagi's shot on De Villiers or Su'a's stamp on Louw? Or maybe they didn't mean "all" acts of foul play. Tongue in cheek of course but this mess really just stinks like a steaming pile of crap. As with pretty much everyone else on here. I was surprised he got let off but stoked that the IRB's appeal fell short for the numerous reasons already posted.

Bring on the 3rd Test!!

 

[Bullrush]

I many be reading thr wrong handbook, and this is all somewhat irrelevant now it the issue is over, though I thought that last time, but the merit based scheme means the officials aren't picked by the home union.




Appeals are dealt with in Reg 18

Do you have a link to Reg 18? The one I'm reading doesn't have it.

 

[Bardon]

Good to see Horwill was cleared to play. Now let's forget this crap and concentrate on the important thing, the rugby. There's a series to be won and hopefully the 3rd installment will be just as exciting as the 1st two but with more of the quality of the 1st one.

I'd love a Lions victory but both sides have been magnificent. It hasn't been all top quality stuff. The fact both teams have had to cope with injury and adversity and have really dug deep has made it more enjoyable for me. Some might want a 50-35 scoreline try fest. But for me. I'd take a one score game with either team able to win it in the closing minute over a high scoring game that's all but decided with 10 minutes to go.

Either way I hope that this tour is remembered for what happened on the field and in the stands. Both sets of fans have been excellent and are probably closer despite the best efforts of trolls, the IRB and the gutter press.

 

[BPC]

You can sensuously cup a blokes gonads ...

That's not really a phrase I ever expected to read on a rugby website. Except possibly in the Big V thread.

 

[BPC]

I don't think you've understood my post. Obviously the tribunal is "subject to the law".

It was a question about the tribunal itself and whether it actually has the institutional rules and apparatus of a court. I suspect that it does not. Probably one of the reasons it becomes a lottery. Another is that things are likely to get messy fast if players are lawyered up and there is extensive argumentation in a system without robust structures.

This is all predicated on the assumption that the Law and the Courts are a monolithic entity that generally gets things rights, except perhaps the occasional wrong decision that gets splashed across ACA or some other rag. You may be surprised by the reality in the coal face of the legal system (Local Court & District Court).

Those of us who work in the legal system are less surprised than others that the SANZAR and IRB judiciary is a lottery.

 

[BPC]

I'm not sure about the contradictory details but the IRB required merits for appointmenst seem pretty common-sense and fair:

Is there anything in there that doesn't seem fair or looks unreasonable?

The formatting?

 

[Shiggins]

Deans will probably rest Horwill now. Lol

 

[the plastic paddy]

Not sure there was not the slightest suggestion of such a thing having had occurred.... I was at the game and didn't see anything - but the Leinster fans certainly posted about it afterwards including some pretty damning pictures - which I did see. Have just done a quick search and can't find a link the stills that were published four years ago but from memory it occurrred when there was a bit of a scrap involving both teams - shaggy came in and paullie dragged him out by his eyesockets. I acknowledge it never made the papers, but it was all over the bulletin boards. Pretty poor that I can't post evidence, I accept, but perhaps the public forums are harder to find things on four years later. Actually surprised by this reaction, certainly my Leinster mates were aware of this (but perhaps thats because I live in Dublin)???? That wasn't meant to be the point of my post and I certainly hope it doesn't detract from the point, which is that rugby has a problem that needs to be fixed, but this is not the way of doing it.

Been asking around and can't find anything about Paulie gouging, there was controversy because he didn't condemn Alan Quinlan's actions and the British press used it as a stick to start beating him because they didn't like him being Captain of the Lions and threw their toys because Borthwick wasn't picked. I agree rugby has a problem with consistency of citing procedure and have advocated a clear solution.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Justice may be blind but not cheap.

How much has this debacle cost, both in real terms and intangibles.
In real terms - QC (Quade Cooper)'s don't come cheap.

In intangibles - It has now been revealed that the key issue that they were examining was not Big Kev's act but the process used by their own bloke to establish that Big Kev's was not guilty as charged/cited.

The way this has been handed by IRB is rather strange. If it was all about the procedure and process used by the original Judiciary, WTF was Big Kev fronting up again to sing for his supper.

Anyhow - the IRB PR machine has been revealed to be staffed with the same unpaid interns as the ARU.

Existing prejudices of the IRB have been reinforced.
Wobs have been distracted in their buildup.

All stuff this series and the IRB do not need.