<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Jan 19 2010, 03:41 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
So what are we saying here? Those who blatantly gouge or rake the eyes should be given a lighter sentence purely because the presiding legal official might have acted leniently against another club for a different offence in the past? I simply cannot agree with that.[/b]
Sanctions have to be equal and fair compared to each other , not depending on the wind . i have never said that it has to be a lighter sentence but there should be the same rule for everybody , it is the basic of justice.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Jan 19 2010, 03:41 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Gouging is completely different to match fixing or corruption. All the parties involved in "Bloodgate" (Harlequins, Mark Evans, etc) have a chance to start over and recover. Someone who has his eyesight irretrievably damaged by a finger cannot start over. His career will have been ended.[/b]
i do not agree with that. gouging is not a prepared plan , it is a decision of a moment when you are in a middle of a match of rugby. "Bloodgate" is not rugby , it is litteraly cheating and prepared. I do not say gouging is a part of rugby but , from my POV , if it has no consequences , the intention could be more "forgivable" in this contact sport (why we do not judge all guys who want to punch somebody else ? as well there is intention and there could be very bad injuries by punching somebody eye or face...you think maybe that eye gouge would be more vicious ? it is really too much open to interpretations all of that ). For example and i told it already , i have been more shocked by Traille taking the leg of Habana in november to beat his own teammate Clerc , it is far from rugby spirit for me .
I think we should say that an intention of eye gouge should be punished by the exact same sanction each time , that would be fair cause if you let 1 person being able to choose the gravity or the lenght of the sanction (or almost ...
http://www.ercrugby.com/images/content/cupstandard/IRB_Sanctions.pdf ) , there won't be fair judgements . An eye gouge with injury consequences should deserve a very long ban . There is too few judges at the ERC commission and they have too much freedom to take important decisions like that...and i guess that it is always a little bit same guys (from a "panel" as it is said in the text below) who are part of the "Independant ERC disciplinary commission" . Defenetly some work to do at this level , being more serious and not letting a bunch of guys being in position to take so important decisions .
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
) Citing Commissioner
a) Citing Commissioners will be appointed by ERC for all Heineken Cup and all televised Amlin Challenge Cup matches and shall be entitled to cite a Player for any act or acts of Foul Play that in the Citing Commissioner's opinion warranted a citing.
x) For such matches Clubs will not have the power to cite a player but may refer incidents to the Citing Commissioner within 24 hours of the conclusion of the match.
C) The Citing Commissioner will have 50 hours from the start of the game to make a citing and the determination of the Citing Commissioner will be final and binding. In exceptional circumstances this deadline can be extended.
d) The Disciplinary Officer may forward the submitted Citing to a Citing Officer to determine whether there are sufficient grounds for the citing to progress.
e) The Disciplinary Officer will then bring a charge against the cited player.
(ii) Citing Officer
a) for Amlin Challenge Cup games which are not on live television, where a player is cited by either of the clubs competing in the match, his case shall be immediately referred to the Citing Officer.
x) The citing must be submitted in writing and received by the Citing Officer within 50 hours of the start of the match. The Citing Officer will consider the citing and decide whether the player cited has a case to answer.
C) After this review, if the Citing Officer determines there is no case to answer, no further action will be taken. The determination of the Citing Officer will be final and binding.
d) Should the Citing Officer decide there is a case to answer he will notify the Disciplinary Officer and the Disciplinary Officer will then bring a charge against the cited player.
e) This case will then proceed to a Disciplinary Hearing.
(iii) Independent Disciplinary Hearing
a) Citing hearings will be heard by an independent Judicial Officer as soon as is practicable. Until the hearing a cited player is eligible to play in ERC tournaments
x) The independent Judicial Officer is chosen by the Chairman of the independent Disciplinary Panel, Professor Lorne Crerar.
C) The ERC Disciplinary Officer, Roger O'Connor, presents the case against the player
d) Both parties to the hearing (ERC and the player) have the right to appeal decisions of the independent Disciplinary Hearing. Appeals must be lodged within 72 hours of receiving the full written decision from the Chairman of the independent Disciplinary Committee
e) The full written decision of the independent Judicial Officer will be available on ercrugby.com/disciplinenews when the disciplinary process is complete.[/b]
There is only one guy at each level who takes decisions and it does not seem to me a good way to judge all of that fairly , I think there should be more people , at least one of each country in this commission. Even if somebody can be reconized as not partial , he will always be influencable...at least by his education ans his culture.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Jan 19 2010, 03:41 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
I have absolutely no sympathy for Attoub, Best, Dupuy and Hartley as gouging is incredibly barbaric. In fact, we're the only contact sport in the world that suffers from an epidemic of gouging.
We need to ask ourselves why Rugby suffers from gouging. Why are we the only sport that is blighted by this evil act and why do our authorities apply the law either ineffectively and without consistency?![/b]
Bad habits from the past maybe . and we have to fight it without doubt . you (or somebody else) were saying that there would be a lot of eye gouge in France , i do not think so as i do not think that french rugby (today) would be more violent than some other european rugby (in the past yeah , it is explainable by the fact that french rugby grew up with "basic people" as english rugby grew up as more or less a posh sport at scholl so with educated people ). if you look at ERC sanctions decisions in the past , let says since 2000 , there are not so many frenchies , certainly not more than any other european country but often it is an "exemplary" sanction .
