rugbyunion
Latest News:

Saints & Sinners Message Board


Quicklinks


TomDSaint
TomDSaint (IP Logged)

An eye for an eye
25 March, 2012 12:52
Like many on the this board I've been hugely frustrated over the years at the inconsistent and at times seemingly arbitrary nature of the citings process, something that seems to have only marginally improved since Judge Blackett handed Elvis Costello back his Wheel of Fortune.

It was therefore wonderful to see one of the Sky commentary team offering a new and enlightened take on the disciplinary proceedings.

When asked not to comment on the Callum Clarke/Rob Hawkins incident Will Greenwood suggested (to a back drop of the incident being shown from multiple angles) "he should be banned for as long as Hawkins is out for…an eye for an eye".

Now we're talking!

However having contemplated Will's suggestion over a slightly reduced sleep, half a bottle of red, some cheese and whilst painting the spare room some of the flaws in Will's suggestion have become more apparent.

What if the player injured performs a Cipriani-esque miracle recovery and returns in two weeks from fracture dislocation of his foot, if this were caused by a deliberate act how could a two week ban be in any way fair?

No, the only way is, and as I'm sure Will intended, for the literal Old Testament interpretation.

I can see it now, 20,000 people crammed in to Welford Road to witness Alessandro Tuilangi attempt to pull Chris Ashton two metres by his hair alone, fly halves from throughout the premiership can line up Jack-Ass style in an attempt to decapitate Chris Hala'ufia using only their shoulders (take note G Pisi). The citings process eventually could turn into a more financial viable facet of the sport than at least 50% of premiership clubs.

This would also stop the gross miscarriage of justice where prop David Attoub is banned for 70 weeks for inflicting no injury what-so-ever.

Should this much needed overall take place the only question is will James Haskell and Stephen Ferris be able to make any time in their soon to be full calendars to play any rugby? Frankly, who cares when Hartley and Ferris are performing their rendition of youtube classic 'Charlie bit my finger' to an audience of millions.

On another note, I've just heard that Judge Blackett would like to go to Chelsea and finds nothing amusing about Peace, Love and Understanding.

Before any one asks, I'm a Saints fan, I have views on the CC incident but would rather not air them here. I'm just disappointed in the plummet of Will Greenwood from decent rugby commentator/pundit to run of the mill Sky rentagob. I just hope Dean Ryan gets out before it's too late

 
MESSAGES->author
St Francis (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
25 March, 2012 14:05
I saw that bit with Greenwood, thought at the time that it was a silly thing to say. The Sky people seemed to be desperate to pass more comment but couldn't because it's still sub judice (or whatever the term is for Blackett's kangaroo courts).

 
MESSAGES->author
Jazzman (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
25 March, 2012 14:32
Quote:
TomDSaint
Before any one asks, I'm a Saints fan

So welcome

It is sad that your first post has to be yet another post on a sad event. Hasn't this been done to death? Come Tuesday judgement will be served.

Leave it be...just think on Wednesday there will be the threads stating the ban (if there is one) is too long/short and it will all be resurected again and all and sundry will be voicing their opinions....what joy!

 
Maverick1
Phil. (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
25 March, 2012 15:17

 
TomDSaint
TomDSaint (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
25 March, 2012 15:36
I genuinely didn't intend the post to be about CC,

I just found Sky's stance contradictory ("we won't talk about it" - so don't) and Greenwood's statement so absurd I couldn't help posting.

 
MESSAGES->author
St Marlowe (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
25 March, 2012 15:48
Don't Worry TomD
I read it as the swipe at Sky's ability to corrupt that you intended



David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

 
MESSAGES->author
Howlin (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
25 March, 2012 21:23
Good post TomD. They all sell their soul to the Sky dollar eventually.



Saint til I die

 
John Rickerd
John Rickerd (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
25 March, 2012 22:28
Not just Sky, ESPN commented at length today, it's inevitable surely.

 
Eif Jones
Eif Jones (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
26 March, 2012 01:12
Don't believe Geenwood would have suggested that when Martin J stuck his knee into McCrae's ribs and broke a few of them and got a ridiculously short sentence that ended on the Friday before the first 6N game on the next day. Clark is not important to England's tour of SA but Hartley is, so, if the MJ precedent is to be followed, the sentences will probably reflect that.

 
MESSAGES->author
St Marlowe (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
26 March, 2012 07:23
He is being judged by an international committee Eif MJ was an English hearing - as ever you are making an erroneous assertion and standing on that to make some twisted anti-English point.

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good old dig at the country in which you live. - Because some people might actually take you seriously.



David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

 
Hugh de Fortit
Hugh de Fortit (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
26 March, 2012 13:34
Quote:
St Marlowe replying to Eif Jones
But don't let the facts get in the way of a good old dig at the country in which you live

Ah I am afraid that I will have to correct you there David, where Eif lives the vast majority of the people have there heads to far up each others rectums or way up in the clouds that they consider that they live on another planet.

Not that I am saying that this has affected Eif's judgements in any way of course.

(Sm132)

 
MESSAGES->author
St Marlowe (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
26 March, 2012 13:41
Eif - Judgement

Now theres a concept!



David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

 
saint_tim
Saint Tim (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
26 March, 2012 16:24
Vast majority - I don't think so. A vocal minority - couldn't disagree with that statement.



http://www.smurfomatic.plus.com/sttim.gif

“Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

Benjamin Franklin

Tetleys Block F E143

 
SaintsDuncan
SaintsDuncan (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
26 March, 2012 18:44
I seem to recall discussing something similar to Greenwood's suggestion some years back (if memory serves it was when Budge was hobbling about on crutches?).

As I recall it, someone had lamped AB good and proper picking up a two week ban for their troubles. AB was out for four weeks with concussion.

 
MESSAGES->author
Saint Dom (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
26 March, 2012 18:59
What's going on here?

Anyway, here's the story of the Martin Johnson offence, to which Eif refers above:

35 days hard labour.

Looking back over a decade, it's remarkable to see how little has changed. One law for Leicester, the arch-cheaters, and one for the rest...



http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/99/99_0_1202835632.jpg
*I could agree with you - but then we'd both be wrong...*

 
jo
jojo (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
26 March, 2012 21:32
From a one eyed Tiger-

IMO before sentence is passed on Hartley I would like to know what Ferris' finger was doing in Hartleys mouth.

IMO Hartley should not be severely punished.

CC on the other hand - Well I can't say anything as it is sub judice- apart from it doesn't look good.

Ben Youngs if he is cited possibly anything from one week to maybe 4. Wouldn't care if it was 12 weeks as I would prefer him not to go on the summer tour to SA.

Manu has served his time.

Ashton should have been out longer for no reason except that it's him.

Tigers to keep winning

Saints to keep trying

 
MESSAGES->author
St Marlowe (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
26 March, 2012 22:51
Quote:
jojo to keep posting
http://i3.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/250/draft_lens11351661module104565711photo_1275690627One-Eyed_Tiger.JPG

And Dom - What's going on here is that Mr Jones is confusing a RFU committee that imposed a convenient sentence on MJ, with a ERC committee that has no such vested interest and inferring that it is all some dastardly plot.

And OP by having a competition that confuses league position and national qualification "petty nationalism" will always surface (from all sides - surprisingly including Wales). No good moaning about it - the competition is neither fish nor fowl.



David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

 
MESSAGES->author
Saint Dom (IP Logged)

Re: An eye for an eye
27 March, 2012 11:06
I like your style, Jojo - but do Tigers really enjoy winning when it's only by cheating they can achieve their ultimate aim?

I'm thinking of Back's hand in that Euro Final. And Murphy taking out Foden at the end of our game against you lot this season.

On the other hand, life would be so dull at Saints without the Significant Other up the road, whose tails and dreads we love to pull...


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?