European Champions Cup Quater Final Saracens v Racing Metro

[goodNumber10]

Im just reacting to the unfairness of the ref decision because it was so one eyed and plain wrong.

It's not wrong, they are sealing off.

You dont watch the league like the rest of this forum so your views on his performance is completed one sided as well.

How would you know what I, the guy who's lived in Paris for the last 8 years watches and doesn't watch?

And either way you put it your use of the word "******" is not ok.

 

[chippieolamus]

What was wrong with the penalty? The previous ruck the Racing players were flopping over the ball and killing it off, so Owens told them that they'd be penalised if they did it again. They then proceeded to do it again at the next ruck, so Owens blew up. What's the problem?

 

[91jmay]

Afraid no one who knows anything about rugby knows that is an obvious penalty, Owen's even gave them a warning which could argue he didn't need to.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

It's not wrong, they are sealing off.



How would you know what I, the guy who's lived in Paris for the last 8 years watches and doesn't watch?

And either way you put it your use of the word "******" is not ok.

Directed at me, he missed/ignored the point of my post. Standard...

 

[Groundhog]

Directed at me, he missed/ignored the point of my post. Standard...

God mom, you don't watch French rugby, you don't understand me!
(*runs up to bedroom, slams door, blares Top 14 Highlights*)

 

[goodNumber10]

Burgers been cited for striking Machenaud:

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,3551_42034,00.html

 

[Raggs]

Nothing about the Waller forearm smash or the french players barge into him after the try was scored. Waller should have pretended to be knocked out, red and 3 weeks then...

Bitter? Moi?

 

[chippieolamus]

Anyone got a vid of the Burger-Machenaud thing?

 

[goodNumber10]

it's a swinging arm in the 40th Minute, that's all i know..

 

[FrenchFan]

The real problem within Racing is that they're kicking coach, or whatever his official role is, cares more about the faggoty 10's country than Racing Metro. Sexton is a winner who has won with every team he has ever played for apart from Racing right back to when he was 16, precedent would most certainly give a conclusion that the problem is with Racing Metro and not Johnny Sexton... Who, had he been on the pitch when they ****ed up would have stopped it because unlike the 15 headless chickens who finished the game would have known that Saracens aren't a side who'll score a 100m try and pin them back in the corner! To blame one player for a team's troubles is incredibly naive, one eyed and plain wrong.

Not true.

Sexton is set up for life with the money hes made with Racing. Also he has been offered a very generous extension to his contract. And the club has never stood in the way of his intl career.

He's been average in the league and showed lack of commitment & heart for his club. Little Irish Prima dona. Its up to him to rise to his clubs ambitions and show his commitment. He hasnt repaid his club on the pitch.

I didnt blame him for his club unfair exit in 1/4. I said Racing were done by the ref and they were. Everyone here is sold on that.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Saw a clip of it earlier but can't find it now - was a vine so can probably find it on twitter somewhere.
Machenaud was passing the ball from the floor and Burger dove at him - was about as late as Lawes hit in the Eng/Fra game, but was a swinging arm to the neck/head.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Saw a clip of it earlier but can't find it now - was a vine so can probably find it on twitter somewhere.
Machenaud was passing the ball from the floor and Burger dove at him - was about as late as Lawes hit in the Eng/Fra game, but was a swinging arm to the neck/head.

So would you say he will get done for it ?

 

[goodNumber10]

not sure if this will work (if not click the link):

[video]http://zippy.gfycat.com/ZestyFondLamb.webm[/video]

 

[ratsapprentice]

Probably - he should do, it's a swinging arm on a player who isn't elligible to be tackled - the tackle is already complete.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Does look like a punch/swinging arm to me. Probably get 4 weeks maybe more if his disciplinary record is that bad.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Don't think it's a punch, but it doesn't really matter - you can't tackle a guy that's already been tackled.

 

[91jmay]

Not true.

Sexton is set up for life with the money hes made with Racing. Also he has been offered a very generous extension to his contract. And the club has never stood in the way of his intl career.

He's been average in the league and showed lack of commitment & heart for his club. Little Irish Prima dona. Its up to him to rise to his clubs ambitions and show his commitment. He hasnt repaid his club on the pitch.

I didnt blame him for his club unfair exit in 1/4. I said Racing were done by the ref and they were. Everyone here is sold on that.

No wonder French international team is so poor then if people know that little about rugby in the country.

 

[FrenchFan]

well we can tell an Irish mercenary when we see one. And that doesnt require an indepth knowledge of the game.

 

[valley commando]

like I said I won't stick up for Racing. Not even if u paid me.

Im just reacting to the unfairness of the ref decision because it was so one eyed and plain wrong.

Now Sexton based on his performance for Racing doesnt even make the top 5 outhalves in the league. Hes been average all season showing a complete lack of disrpect to fans and a club that is shelling a fortune for his services.

When youre paid 500K a year the least you can do if you're a true pro with a modicum of self-respect is turn up for your club and put in performances fans will talk about and remember. Racing fans are still waiting. How many Racing fans have you asked. You dont need answer that one.

You dont watch the league like the rest of this forum so your views on his performance is completed one sided as well.

I watch the top 14, its a far more exiting competition than either the pro 12 or english championship and you make a fair point about Sexton. Lydiate didn't impress much either when he was there.
Charteris on the other hand has been impressive for the Paris side much as he was for USAP before they got relegated.
USAP is the French side I follow sadly don't get much coverage in the UK of pro div 2.

- - - Updated - - -

Burgers been cited for striking Machenaud:

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,3551_42034,00.html

Yes its disgusting that he just got a week/game allowing him to play in the semi, if you get banned for a week it should apply to the comp they were playing in when the offence was committed.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Yes its disgusting that he just got a week/game allowing him to play in the semi, if you get banned for a week it should apply to the comp they were playing in when the offence was committed.

So you blatantly mame someone in the World Cup final and escape sanction for the next four years? Good idea!

 

[valley commando]

So you blatantly mame someone in the World Cup final and escape sanction for the next four years? Good idea!

Are you illiterate ? The word is maim.
You think its fair that someone gets banned for thumping someone in the quater final and is eligible to play in the semi.

 

[Feicarsinn]

Are you illiterate ? The word is maim.
You think its fair that someone gets banned for thumping someone in the quater final and is eligible to play in the semi.

Are you illiterate? The word is quarter.

 

[lucky number 7]

Are you illiterate? The word is quarter.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Are you illiterate ? The word is maim.
You think its fair that someone gets banned for thumping someone in the quater final and is eligible to play in the semi.

You're right, I misspelled one word, I'm clearly illiterate.

I think it's the fairest solution that I've heard proposed, more more fairerer (damn, must go and take my illiteracy pills) than the solution you're proposing - what a farce it would be for a player who is "convicted" of reprehensible thuggery in a cup competition to be able to play the next week in the league. It could take two or three years of European competition for such a player to work off their ban, during which time they could fall out of contention or retire having never "done their time". What would it have done for the credibility of the game if Duncan McRea was allowed to play the week after his attack on ROG on the basis that he had to wait another 12 years to serve the first week of his seven year ban when the Lions next came to town?!?

To me, if there is a scandal here (other than the terrible crime of playing for an English side), it is the fact that (once again) we have seen the ban cut by 50% because he smiled politely and said sorry - this should be the expectation, not a reason to receive special treatment IMO.

 

[ratsapprentice]

To me, if there is a scandal here (other than the terrible crime of playing for an English side), it is the fact that (once again) we have seen the ban cut by 50% because he smiled politely and said sorry - this should be the expectation, not a reason to receive special treatment IMO.

Yeah, I really don't think it's a worthwhile factor in determining the length of the ban... when was the last time someone didn't apologise or show remorse?

 

[Peat]

Yeah, I really don't think it's a worthwhile factor in determining the length of the ban... when was the last time someone didn't apologise or show remorse?

David Attoub, who instead contended the images showing him gouging had been doctored, and got a 70 week ban.

 

[ratsapprentice]

:lol:

 

[RedruthRFC]

Yeah, I really don't think it's a worthwhile factor in determining the length of the ban... when was the last time someone didn't apologise or show remorse?

Peat's example aside, exactly. I would rather see the emphasis put the other way around, i.e. the ban given is what the committee sees as appropriate within the WR's guidelines, then extra time is added on if the player has failed to apologise, not conducted himself well at the hearing, failed to admit guilt or has plenty of previous. Just seems a more gentlemanly and transparent way of doing things.

Speaking of which, when is the last time a ban was extended on the basis of previous indiscretions?

 

[Peat]

Peat's example aside, exactly. I would rather see the emphasis put the other way around, i.e. the ban given is what the committee sees as appropriate within the WR's guidelines, then extra time is added on if the player has failed to apologise, not conducted himself well at the hearing, failed to admit guilt or has plenty of previous. Just seems a more gentlemanly and transparent way of doing things.

Speaking of which, when is the last time a ban was extended on the basis of previous indiscretions?

Hartley's last ban reflected "the player's record rather than the seriousness of the offence itself" - 3 weeks rather than the minimum of 2.

Given that said ban was Hartley's 5th, and his 4th featured a reduction rather than an increase, that appears to be the tipping point.

 

[valley commando]

Are you illiterate? The word is quarter.

Nice one