Rougeries's eye gouge

[Jay]

Just because Rougerie has hand near/on McCaws eye doesn't mean he had the intent of gouging his eye. None of the photos show where Rougerie was looking or show him feeling around to find McCaws eye. Just Like McCaws fist and knee making accidental conduct with Parras head, Rougeries fingers could be accidentally making contact McCaws eye. If the IRB thought Rougerie eye gouged McCaw, then Rougerie would have been cited by the match review panel.
No citing, no case to answer, not guilty.

McCaw has a very good reason to be doing what he's doing when his knee collects Parra - Rougerie has no reason to be raking at anything the way he did. If he's not looking to go for McCaw's eyes, what is supposedly doing?

 

[pete88]

...trying to pick his nose for him...?

IIRC raking the face is a reasonably serious suspension-worth offence anyway right? Mostly due to the fact that there's no good reason to be trying it?

 

[Jay]

...trying to pick his nose for him...?

IIRC raking the face is a reasonably serious suspension-worth offence anyway right? Mostly due to the fact that there's no good reason to be trying it?

I seem to recall Bakkies Botha was suspended for 'attacking the face' of Brendan Cannon, so possibly.

 

[Lee Enfield]

The point is, just because his hand is on or near McCaws eye does not mean he was intentionally raking or eye gouging. He could have been trying to push McCaw out of the way, he could have been using McCaws head to prop himself up, he might have been coming in to clear another player out by lifting his leg and driving him and McCaw got in the way. Just because his hand is near McCaws eye does not mean he is trying to rake or gouge, still photos do nothing to prove whether or not the action was deliberate. Looking at stills, it would be just as easy to argue a case that McCaw deliberately attacked Parra's head twice.
If he had intentionally attacked McCaws face/eyes, the match review panel would have picked it up and cited him, they didn't, so they must have thought there was nothing in it.

 

[Jay]

What still photos? There's video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FQkwYfqDnU

 

[Gagger]

Jay - out of everyone it's you keeping this bullshit thread alive. Rule 10 warning on this and the other disappearing up their own backside threads you can't leave alone. You're sapping my energy for life.

InsideShoulder and a few others are not far behind

Everyone - Time to let ALL these bullshit threads go. Find something else, PLEASE!!

The mods are restless and trigger happy from here on in

 

[Jay]

Fair enough.

 

[John the baptist]

To be honest, I didn't think there was any dangerous intent in the O'Driscoll tackle. If O'Driscoll had rolled with the tackle rather than putting his arm in a stupid place he wouldn't have been injured at all. I don't mind the interpretation of the law that says the tackler is responsible if they lift someone, but what O'Driscoll did was terrible technique, and caused his injury more than the tackle.

Perhaps you could show us all a clip of how you would execute that technique? The point is whether thrown with force to the ground or simply dropped from a height, that both methods represent dangerous play.

 

[John the baptist]

No-one ever taught you how to avoid getting injured in a tackle? Don't put your arm out is No 1.

The whole thing is massively overhyped - and he wasn't "driven towards the ground" watch the video.

Really!!

As you approach the ground HEAD FIRST what the fuck are you expected to do?

Please show us all a clip of how you handled this. :

 

[John the baptist]

Jay - out of everyone it's you keeping this bullshit thread alive. Rule 10 warning on this and the other disappearing up their own backside threads you can't leave alone. You're sapping my energy for life.

InsideShoulder and a few others are not far behind

Everyone - Time to let ALL these bullshit threads go. Find something else, PLEASE!!

The mods are restless and trigger happy from here on in

Sorry gagger if I have prolonged this further than it should go. I responded as i read. Happy to stop and let go.

As a final observation we all have to agree that foul play is not acceptable. Equally, unpunished foul play will result in a response. That response may be unaccepable. But it may be self preservation.

In the last 15 minutes of RWC 2011 I as a failed "french" prop would have been taking the head off Joubert!