This Is Why Gouging Should Be Dealt With Harshly

[mohamed_ali12]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/8489723.stm

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

Kent police are investigating an incident at a rugby game in which a player was blinded in one eye when he was apparently gouged by an opponent.

Clarence Harding was taken to hospital during a cup match between his side Gravesend Rugby Club and Maidstone RFC.

The Gravesend club wants its mid-Kent rivals to investigate after surgeons said the 26-year-old was unlikely to regain the sight in his right eye.

The number eight said the ball had been nowhere near his head when he was hurt.

Club officials said they were "deeply concerned" by the injury, which happened earlier this month at Maidstone's Mote Park ground.

Mr Harding said: "I was on the floor presenting the ball for my team-mates when I felt a finger sticking into the corner of my eye.

Life ban call

"It was over in an instant but it dawned on me very quickly that something pretty serious had happened."

Gravesend RFC chairman Graham Haggar said pictures taken during the clash on 17 January were being examined and that no-one had suffered such a serious injury in the club's history.

He said: "We are anxious to co-operate with any investigation to establish what happened in the match and we will support our player and his family in any way we can."

Mr Haggar added any player found to have committed eye gouging should be banned from rugby for life and "face the full weight of the criminal law".

A Kent Police spokeswoman said: "Police are investigating an incident of grievous bodily harm where a 26-year-old man sustained a serious injury to his eye following a rugby match in Maidstone on January 17.

"The incident occurred at the sports field at Mote Park at around 2.40pm."[/b]

Disgusting.

 

[Bullitt]

Isn't there something else to witch-hunt yet? I'm sick to death of hearing about it.

 

[RC]

I agree, this is absolutely awful.
The only problem is nothing will be done about this until a high profile player is left in the same state as this poor individual.
It's against the laws of the game and if you injure a player in a way that's against the rulings of the game then it should be considered as an act of GBH.
You wouldn't be allowed to do that in the middle of the street and expect to get away with it, why should it be any different on a rugby field.
Maybe that would help stop it happening: if a high profile player actually gets a criminal record for the incident.

 

[Prestwick]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bullitt @ Jan 31 2010, 07:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Isn't there something else to witch-hunt yet? I'm sick to death of hearing about it.[/b]

Well if people would stop gouging/raking the face then we wouldn't hear about it.

Simples.

 

[Bullitt]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Jan 31 2010, 08:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bullitt @ Jan 31 2010, 07:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Isn't there something else to witch-hunt yet? I'm sick to death of hearing about it.[/b]

Well if people would stop gouging/raking the face then we wouldn't hear about it.

Simples.
[/b][/quote]

Rubbish. It forever has gone on and forever will, however it's the latest media buzz-word. Much like "paedophile" or "terrorist" is.

 

[Prestwick]

Then we'll keep hearing about it and we'll keep campaigning to get rid of it.

Throw the book at the buggers and punish them and then name and shame them but never let it fall away from the press.

Gouging is not rugby so lets not talk about it like it is.

 

[lucky_number_7]

its the ultimate trick for cowards gouging

id often find myself at the bottom of a ruck and next thing someone have a go at your eyes...there the very same lads that when you confront them toe to toe will back down ..cowards ever one no place for them on a rugby field

 

[Juggernaut]

Bullitt, seriously mate....you wouldnt be saying that if some culprit takes out your eyeball for good.

It's despicable, disgusting and unsportsmanship.

and if you still think it's a non-issue, then I hope some c*** takes out your eye.

 

[Fa'atau82]

This is actually my local club. I have been gouged before quite seriously and it's affected my vision, so i feel for Clarence. I just hope they get the scum who did this, ban him for life, and for Clarence to get something out of this. It's appaling at any level, but when absolutely nothing is at stake, for me.. it makes it that much more sinister than just trying to get an edge over an opponent.

 

[Georgie F]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fa'atau82 @ Feb 1 2010, 06:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

This is actually my local club. I have been gouged before quite seriously and it's affected my vision, so i feel for Clarence. I just hope they get the scum who did this, ban him for life, and for Clarence to get something out of this. It's appaling at any level, but when absolutely nothing is at stake, for me.. it makes it that much more sinister than just trying to get an edge over an opponent.[/b]

Is it not time to look at what is known of this incident instead of believing all the media hype? It would appear according to the Gravesend chairman that no one saw the incident - not the referee, the touch judges, players on the bench, players on the pitch, spectators. How curious! In fact the only person who allegedly saw anything was the father of the victim? Apparently no reaction from either club on the field of play or after the game. Plenty of media coverage though. Is no-one just slightly concerned at how the poor victim has made sure of media coverage, and in publications such as the Sun - allegedly not known for their concern over the facts! As much as I agree that gouging should be dealt with to the letter of the law and I sympthise with the victim can we remember that this could have been an accident and not deliberate. Finally innocent until proven otherwise should prevail even in this "not my fault I must be able to blame someone" culture that we live in.

 

[Bullitt]

In a same but different scenario, I found myself with someones fingers in my eyes during a pike block during a battle re-enactment last year - (a pike block is like a giant rolling maul with around 25 men on each team, each coated in steel and leather armour carrying 16 foot long pikes). Nobody made a fuss however, I simply told one of my regiment about it and apparently they figured out who it was.

By the time we were due to finish the perpetrator had vanished from the field... He was in the medics tent with a broken nose. Dunno how that happened...

I thought of it no more.

 

[Prestwick]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Georgie F @ Feb 4 2010, 01:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Is it not time to look at what is known of this incident instead of believing all the media hype? It would appear according to the Gravesend chairman that no one saw the incident - not the referee, the touch judges, players on the bench, players on the pitch, spectators. How curious! In fact the only person who allegedly saw anything was the father of the victim? Apparently no reaction from either club on the field of play or after the game. Plenty of media coverage though. Is no-one just slightly concerned at how the poor victim has made sure of media coverage, and in publications such as the Sun - allegedly not known for their concern over the facts! As much as I agree that gouging should be dealt with to the letter of the law and I sympthise with the victim can we remember that this could have been an accident and not deliberate. Finally innocent until proven otherwise should prevail even in this "not my fault I must be able to blame someone" culture that we live in.[/b]

Before this thread descends into rampant name calling and flaming, I just want to understand what motivation or benefit exactly someone who has been blinded in one eye to "blame it on someone else."

You're sarcastically referring to him as the "poor victim", mate, the guy has lost vision in one eye. What are we meant to call him? A heartless *******?! A disgusting scoundrel?

The guy is simply calling it as he felt it. A finger. In his eye. Causing serious pain and damage.

If the photographic evidence being studied shows gouging is then I'd be really dissapointed and disgusted but until then I'm going to treat as it is: a man whose vision has been severely restricted in the most painful of ways.

Something had to have caused that. Theres no smoke without fire.

As an aside, you're not a fan/member of the other team who was playing on the day are you?

 

[lucky_number_7]

regardless of who has seen it there is now a guy somewhere without the sight in one of his eyes because of a cowardly act on a rugby field ....everyone knows when they step on the rugby field theres a chance of getting injured but the though of an opposition player going out deliberatly and jamming a finger into your eye is revolting ...if that happenned on the street thats a jail sentance right there ....why should it be any different if its on a rugby field

 

[shtove]

I never had an eye gouged when playing. It's one of those sensitive areas that we react instantly to protect (you know the other one). A finger in the eye is deliberate and precise. Make all the excuses you want, it just means criminal prosecution will have to sort out the abusers, and that will have big consequences for insurance cover. Sadly, an article in the Times the other day played down the concerns over this.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

Is it not time to look at what is known of this incident instead of believing all the media hype? It would appear according to the Gravesend chairman that no one saw the incident - not the referee, the touch judges, players on the bench, players on the pitch, spectators. How curious! In fact the only person who allegedly saw anything was the father of the victim?[/b]

The victim definitely didn't see anything.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

In a same but different scenario, I found myself with someones fingers in my eyes during a pike block during a battle re-enactment last year - (a pike block is like a giant rolling maul with around 25 men on each team, each coated in steel and leather armour carrying 16 foot long pikes). Nobody made a fuss however, I simply told one of my regiment about it and apparently they figured out who it was.[/b]

From your politics, I'm guessing you're a cavalier, but for some reason you have to be a roundhead. I suppose a finger in the eye is better than a pike - Ouch! - but the finger was deliberate and something was done about it. What if the finger had blinded you for life? What would have been done then?

 

[Georgie F]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Feb 4 2010, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Georgie F @ Feb 4 2010, 01:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is it not time to look at what is known of this incident instead of believing all the media hype? It would appear according to the Gravesend chairman that no one saw the incident - not the referee, the touch judges, players on the bench, players on the pitch, spectators. How curious! In fact the only person who allegedly saw anything was the father of the victim? Apparently no reaction from either club on the field of play or after the game. Plenty of media coverage though. Is no-one just slightly concerned at how the poor victim has made sure of media coverage, and in publications such as the Sun - allegedly not known for their concern over the facts! As much as I agree that gouging should be dealt with to the letter of the law and I sympthise with the victim can we remember that this could have been an accident and not deliberate. Finally innocent until proven otherwise should prevail even in this "not my fault I must be able to blame someone" culture that we live in.[/b]

Before this thread descends into rampant name calling and flaming, I just want to understand what motivation or benefit exactly someone who has been blinded in one eye to "blame it on someone else."

You're sarcastically referring to him as the "poor victim", mate, the guy has lost vision in one eye. What are we meant to call him? A heartless *******?! A disgusting scoundrel?

The guy is simply calling it as he felt it. A finger. In his eye. Causing serious pain and damage.

If the photographic evidence being studied shows gouging is then I'd be really dissapointed and disgusted but until then I'm going to treat as it is: a man whose vision has been severely restricted in the most painful of ways.

Something had to have caused that. Theres no smoke without fire.

As an aside, you're not a fan/member of the other team who was playing on the day are you?
[/b][/quote]

No I'm actually a fan of Rugby and fair play. If the incident is proven to be deliberate then it is important that the full force of criminal and rugby law are handed down. I merely wish to point out that there is an alternative explanation.

 

[Georgie F]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lucky_number_7 @ Feb 4 2010, 08:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

regardless of who has seen it there is now a guy somewhere without the sight in one of his eyes because of a cowardly act on a rugby field ....everyone knows when they step on the rugby field theres a chance of getting injured but the though of an opposition player going out deliberatly and jamming a finger into your eye is revolting ...if that happenned on the street thats a jail sentance right there ....why should it be any different if its on a rugby field[/b]

Interesting how you have concluded that there was a cowardly act committed. I assume you have reached this conclusion based upon the mountains of factual evidence that has been presented to you? This incident is being investigated by the police. Once they have reached their conclusion then we can all comment on the outcome.

 

[MunsterMan]

Mite your argument is f***ing ridiculous. What is the guy who has been blinded supposed to do? Something tells me a few digs at the bottom of a ruck won't make up for it.

Damn the media persecution of pedophiles as well

 

[lucky_number_7]

georgie ..gouging is cowardly ...simple as and really anyone who believe that it has a place on a rugby field should not be allowed on one

 

[Bullitt]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shtove @ Feb 4 2010, 11:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

What if the finger had blinded you for life? What would have been done then?[/b]

I would have been blind and had to buy a white stick.

Sadly it's all well and good being high and mighty on this issue now the media has started picking up on it. But nothing will completely stop it and it will always go on. All we'll find is it'll move to the public minds back-burner the next time some doctor pipes up that the scrum should be banned again. Or maybe that Australian Mungos shouldn't offer free prostate exams.

Right or not, that's the way it is and the way it always will be. And the idiot players who do it are more likely to be worried about being on the receiving end of a kicking then they are about a fine... Let's not forget that the average intelligence of rugby players seems to be going down as the last of the Amateur players are retiring. Most are too think to think about financial implications of being banned but the fight-or-flight instinct will still be prevalent.

 

[Will]

That's a rather defeatest attitude Bullitt. Terrible things always have and always will happen, be they murder, drug smuggling, idiots with too much to drink causing havoc, people dropping litter.... Just because something will continue to happen does not mean that those who are caught out should not be punished, and punished severely.

It's a cowardly act carried out by people who do know better, and have no reason or justification for doing so. Anyone caught out gowging, including the professionals, should really be facing harsher penalties. If that means getting the law involved on occasion then so be it. Maybe when we've seen a few people dealt with harshly we might begin to see the number of incidents drop.