• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Adam Thomson gets 1 week ban

Gather App
Teh Mite said:
Quote didn't work -


"ignoring the fact Dylan Hartley did a WWE elbow drop on Richie McCaw's head and got no punishment"


You mean he missed and it only looked bad?
Click to expand...

That is a murky area, should you be punished for intent or the result? Always a question I wondered with foul play. Like if you took a massive swing to hit a guy but only glanced him and didn't cause any damage vs the same punch knocking a guy out. Or you could hit two different people with the same punch and have two completely different outcomes.

For me you should be punished the same; the effectiveness of the filth, or lack thereof shouldn't have that much relevance to the punishment.
 
donmcdazzle said:
That is a murky area, should you be punished for intent or the result? Always a question I wondered with foul play. Like if you took a massive swing to hit a guy but only glanced him and didn't cause any damage vs the same punch knocking a guy out. Or you could hit two different people with the same punch and have two completely different outcomes.

For me you should be punished the same; the effectiveness of the filth, or lack thereof shouldn't have that much relevance to the punishment.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The intent or the possible damage that could have occurred to a player is the most important factor in foul play.
 
what is the difference between a week ban and a 1 game ban :?

week ban meaning you can't practise with the team :? meaning you lose a bit a fitness and will prob miss the next game :?

there is only 1 game per week, whats the difference :?
 
Teh Mite said:
You mean he missed and it only looked bad?
Click to expand...

He did not miss.

hartley-mccaw.gif


What this .gif doesn't show is how far back Hartley came from, how fast he was running, and the fact that this was after the whistle as well. It was a petulant piece of thuggery by a player who is well known as a dirty prick. Hartley's forearm struck McCaw on the left jaw, and his thigh (just above the knee) struck him on the nose. It looked bad because it was bad!

The impact was hard enough that McCaw had headaches after the game an had to go to hospital for a scan. Bruising but nothing broken, fortunately.

This was a red card offence in any game where a competent referee sees it. It should have been cited and a minimum two weeks suspension. It wasn't; and that is par for the course when SANZAR teams tour the NH.
 
McCaw took a fair bit of **** that tour.
Andy Powell threw a forearm at him near full time in the final match. Stupid ******* deserved a citing for that.
 
Draggs said:
McCaw took a fair bit of **** that tour.
Andy Powell threw a forearm at him near full time in the final match. Stupid ******* deserved a citing for that.
Click to expand...


That will be this one



A year earlier, Dan Carter (a cleaner player would be hard pushed to find) was booed by the Millennium Stadium crowd, vilifed in the press, cited and got one match ban for a high tackle that was nowhere near as bad as this. Andy Powell was not cited, and the British media glossed over it.

This is what I mean about par for the course. There is an outrageous double standard as regards the judiciary when it comes to NH and SH teams playing in the NH. How can anyone suggest, with a straight face, that what Hartley did, and what Powell did, was less serous and less dangerous than Adam Thomson putting his foot on Strokosch's head.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Carter one was indeed bad, but Martin Roberts is like 5 feet.
NH v SH is always going to be a **** fight, no side is cleaner than the other.
 
And now the IRB is "reviewing it's decision" after consultation with british journos...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10849154

Pardon my language, but this is a 4ucken joke.

Whinging 4uckwit journos b!tch and moan about an AB not getting pinged for what is a MINOR incident, and the IRB drop to their knees and assume the position.

Its funny; I Didn't hear Jones, Moore etc moaning that Greyling and Higginbotham (or Hartley, or Powell) only got two weeks for blatant thuggery (and far, far worse incidents of foul play that Thomson committed)
 
Last edited:
FlukeArtist said:
And now the IRB is "reviewing it's decision" after consultation with british journos...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10849154

Pardon my language, but this is a 4ucken joke.

Whinging 4uckwit journos b!tch and moan about an AB not getting pinged for what is a MINOR incident, and the IRB drop to their knees and assume the position.

Its funny; I Didn't hear Jones, Moore etc moaning that Greyling and Higginbotham (or Hartley, or Powell) only got two weeks for blatant thuggery (and far, far worse incidents of foul play that Thomson committed)
Click to expand...




:lol: The utter paranoia, proporganda and outright scare-mongering of the Kiwi media beggars belief. And I thought the left wing media here was bad.
 
Last edited:
Teh Mite said:
:lol: The utter paranoia, proporganda and outright scare-mongering of the Kiwi media beggars belief. And I thought the left wing media here was bad.
Click to expand...

Sorry - I fail to see how this is scare mongering. Perhaps you can enlighten us all?

Regardless of what you think about Thomson or his ban, this is an extremely bad look for both Gosper and the IRB.
If he is so concerned about perceived leniency, why was nothing done about the Higginbotham and Greyling bans?

Like the article states; if the IRB are going to set this precedent, then there will inevitably end up being calls for them to review decisions made in most representative rugby matches.

It's a 4ucken joke
 

Similar threads

B
Best binned for 18 weeks
Replies
14
Views
2K
shazbooger
S

Latest posts

Sponsored
UnlistMe
Back
Top