rugbyunion
Latest News:

Saints & Sinners Message Board


Quicklinks

 

eddiep
Edward (IP Logged)

Clark Report
30 March, 2012 12:59

 
Saintly Russ
Saintly Russ (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 13:14
Makes an interesting read compared to some of the Tosh spouted on here in the past few days.

 
MESSAGES->author
Howlin (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 13:14
reading points 6 and 7 should be enough for any right minded person.

sad very sad. I hope Hawkins makes a full recovery.



Saint til I die

 
MESSAGES->author
Paul Flatt (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 13:16
Ithink that is prety well considered and hope many others take time to read the full judgment



“... I never dreamed about success. I worked for it." Estée Lauder,
American businesswoman

 
Duckonstilts
Duckonstilts (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 13:18
Seems fair to me. Now its down to Calum how he handles his time off. I hope he follows Dylans example (and i'm sure the Captain will have a quite word)

 
BrianB
BrianB (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 13:20
Er...if they can't get the venue right....

 
BrianB
BrianB (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 13:30
Any news on Dylan's report?

 
Opinion8ed
Opinion8ed (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 13:34
Overall I felt that judgement was fair.

However, I was slightly concerned that one of the key reasons for a long ban is that it looked really bad for the image of the game. Whilst I accept that it did, I'm not sure this is a fair way to make a judgement especially as it is down to one man's view and very open to interpretation. On that ground it might be worth an appeal.For example, did it look worse than Tuilangi on Ashton.

Despite this, I also believe it may 'look bad' if the club do appeal and feel that the 'right thing', if there can be such, is to accept the punishment and approbation of the masses; do the time; and come back with as clean a slate as possible.

I also think that if we are going to appeal against anything it should be Hartleys ban. But I await the full judgement on that before commenting further.

Meanwhile I hope that Mr Hawkins makes a full recovery as soon as possible - and that Mr Ferris' finger isnt too sore.

 
Beef
Beef (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 13:51
A full and fair assessment, which should go some way in shutting up, once and for all, all those 'in the know'

Some exerts:
Andrew Wallace, Elbow surgeon:
"I incised the flexor origin to expose the underlying medial collateral ligament. Fortunately this was intact, but I split it longitudinally to remove some small intra-articular fragments"

Callum Clarke

The Player said that Northampton had made a break and were on the ascendancy. He entered the ruck looking for a body to clear out but there was none so he looked for the ball. He found a player (Rob Hawkins) obstructing the ball. He first moved to place his hand on the ball and then the whistle blew. Hawkins’s had moved his hand back to the ball, and that prompted him to take action so Northampton could play quickly. He said: “I grabbed his arm to use as a lever to roll him away in desperation to win the ball. I was not fully aware of how vulnerable he was and that his body could not roll – mainly because another Northampton player was lying on top of him. I felt some resistance from his hand and continued to roll back. I pinned his arm to my chest and hyper extended his elbow. Never any intention for that to happen – I expected his body weight to follow him. Because of his position he was unable to move.” He continued: “I had realised what I had done – I put my hand to my mouth. I knew I was responsible and played rest of game in a fog. After game I was approached by their coach who made it clear what he thought. For me the result of the game was insignificant.”

HHHJB
"The offending was intentional. The Player clearly intended to pull Hawkins’ arm backwards after the whistle had been blown so that the ball became available and his side could play the ball quickly. I accept that he did not intend to harm Hawkins or cause him injury. I come to that conclusion because the Player is not known as one who commits foul play, and by the way he presented and expressed himself at the hearing. He is not a thug and presented as a genuine young man who was prepared to, and accepted, responsibility for his actions and their consequences."
"The incident took about 2 seconds and there was no premeditation"
"police intervention is unlikely as the Player did not have the requisite mens rea to have committed a criminal offence;"


Still, I won't let the facts get in the way of others fully informed rants...



http://www.sportnetwork.net/mainadmin/img/991152054167.gif

Terrace 'B' next to Mav, Shaddo, AB, Jeremy and Spud.

 
MESSAGES->author
ChrisG (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 14:44
Exactly Beef and as said last night some would never be happy short of hanging Calum, even then some would complain about the length of rope.

 
MESSAGES->author
Stockers (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 15:10
Already there's a couple of idiots on the Tiggs board who claim conspiracy theories, quote sentences out of context to support some ludicrous prejudice, reckon they saw far more than the RFU disciplinary team, protest that the whole thing is flawed and question why only Hizzoner sat in judgement rather than a Tribunal, seek a criminal prosecution for GBH (despite Blackett's comments on that point) and yet don't ask why their own club had no representation at the hearing ( I refer to RFU (per pro Haskell) v Hartley) where The Haskwit had half of the tenants of Frigginton Chambers at his side!

Hearing heard, punishment handed down, line drawn, move on.



Northampton Saints - Aviva Premiership Champions 2013/14

 
saint_tim
Saint Tim (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 15:37
Consistency of intent not outcome is what normally dirves law.

The intent and duration of the assault by Manu on Flash was about the same. The judgement says that if Flash had been badly hurt and he could have been (do remember reading stats about single punches that kill or do major damage) then Manu would have been banned for a long time.

Same crime different outcome means different penalty.

Overall I thought it quite a balanced report.



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

 
MESSAGES->author
desbralass (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 15:43
BrianB...yup,made me all confused.



Bridesmaids no more.

 
Big Bird
Big Bird (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 16:00
Some of it is a bit like those puzzles that people put to you when they say "start with a number of your own choice, add 100, subtract half, times it by the number you first thought of" ... and you have your period of suspension.

Why add the period Hawkins is out of the game to an already severe time period, there appears to be no precedent, so can we now expect this to follow for all future disciplinary hearings.

It remains a concern that the Hanging Judge's opinion is that intention to hurt a player on the rugby field is akin to a player leaving the pitch to assault a spectator - as in the case of Trevor Brennan. Some of the 'south sea islander' tackles can only be construed as an intention to cause hurt, why else are they popularly referred to as a 'hit'.

Also, he says that the worst sort of punch may attract a suspension of 52 weeks, which I think vindicates my comments on the other thread.

The RFU consider a damaged elbow to be worse than a punch resulting in facial disfigurement (fractured eye socket / jaw / cheekbone etc) at one end of the spectrum to loss of sight or brain function at the other.

Apparently HJJ was seen leaving court riding on a marsupial.

 
Tom Paine
Tom Paine (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 16:04
Will someone on this board, without abuse or personal comment, please explain to me how you can intend to hyperextend someone's elbow joint - that is pull the arm back against the the natural angle of flex beyond the point of resistance until a bone shatters and some of the ligaments snap and not intend to injure someone. It requires a considerable degree of force to accomplish such an outcome. This is an honest question, not a wind up. I will happily accept a fair and straight answer.

 
MESSAGES->author
St Marlowe (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 16:15
From the report
The offending was intentional. The Player clearly intended to pull Hawkins’ arm backwards after the whistle had been blown so that the ball became available and his side could play the ball quickly. I accept that he did not intend to harm Hawkins or cause him injury. I come to that conclusion because the Player is not known as one who commits foul play, and by the way he presented and expressed himself at the hearing. He is not a thug and presented as a genuine young man who was prepared to, and accepted, responsibility for his actions and their consequences.

I can only assume that he was not aware of the consequence of another player being on top of Hawkins, and thought as he said:

“I grabbed his arm to use as a lever to roll him away in desperation to win the ball. I was not fully aware of how vulnerable he was and that his body could not roll – mainly because another Northampton player was lying on top of him. I felt some resistance from his hand and continued to roll back. I pinned his arm to my chest and hyper extended his elbow. Never any intention for that to happen – I expected his body weight to follow him. Because of his position he was unable to move.”



David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

 
MESSAGES->author
Matthew (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 16:28
Quote:
BrianB
Any news on Dylan's report?

Don't know - I haven't seen any carrier pigeons carrying illuminated vellum lately.

(Why the hold up if Clark's can be released in less than a day?)

 
Tom Paine
Tom Paine (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 16:32
Thank you, St Marlowe. I have read the report.I notice that you quote Clark's account but not the degree of trauma it occasioned - the two do not correspond. I remain unable to square the degree of force required to inflict such an injury with Clark's account of what he did. Blackett accepted Clark's account. Unlike you and him, I remain unconvinced; as, I suspect, does Rob Hawkins.

 
MESSAGES->author
ChrisG (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 16:37
Tom, exactly what do you expect people to say? We know no more or no less than the judgement reports. And yet again, not one person here condones Calums actions so what exactly are you trying to get people to say?

 
just saying ...
just saying ... (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 16:41
Quote:
Tom Paine
Thank you, St Marlowe. I have read the report.I notice that you quote Clark's account

In fairness I think St Marlowe has answered your question in as fair and straight way as any of us can by quoting the relevant part of Callum Clarke's account. Wouldn't anything else be speculation?

 
FyldeShark
FyldeShark (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 16:55
Erm, surely he was 19 when he was red carded, not under 18 as his council stated? Misleading a judge could backfire at appeal.

 
MESSAGES->author
ChrisG (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 16:59
Errrrrrm surely they have their own facts to hand. That wouldn't be presented by the defence.

 
Dick Dastardly
Thrupp artist (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 17:06
Never in the history of these islands has so much been opinionated by so many about something that they can actually know so little.

 
hodgei
hodgei (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 17:23
All in all, it looked a balanced and fair report.
I hope that Calum does not appeal and just gets on with the hard work to get his reputation back.

Some time spent away from the game and doing some volunteer work somewhere may help him put everything into perspective.

Then he can come back, refreshed and hopefully with the kind of maturity we saw from Dylan when he returned from his time out.

My only worry for the lad is that this marks him out and some players will go for some cheap shots and try to get him to snap.

Hopefully the club will be able to give him the support he needs and we can all get back to playing rugby again.

 
galliano2001
galliano2001 (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 17:35
Points 6 and 7 are purely what CC stated in his defence, they are not 'facts'. The only facts are this:

21.56 No 1 for Northampton Tonga’uiha makes break from ruck, Leicester
forwards retreating.
21.58 Tonga’huia goes to ground tackled by Leicester No 15 Murphy.
21.59 Leicester No 2 comes from open play and wraps his arms over
Tonga’huia who is on the ground
22.00 Northampton forwards drive over the forming ruck.
22.01 Leicester No 2 Hawkin’s left arm can be seen over the body of
Tonga’huia
22.03 Referee close to the incident on the open side of play, blow his whistle for
an infringement and brings the game to a halt. Hawkins has arms wrapped
round Tonga’huia
2204 Northampton No6 Clark, on the left side can be seen to go down towards
the ground
22.05 Clark’s left arm can be seen withdrawing and then returning back towards
the ground
22.06 Clark can be seen rotating onto his back, using other players as a fulcrum
as he pulls on the right arm of Hawkins, hyper extending the arm at the elbow
causing a significant injury. This action takes place three seconds arger the
whistle has been blown
22.07 Clark rolls away from ruck. Hawkins can be seen clutching his right
arm/elbow region.
22.10 Hawkins can be seen in considerable discomfort and receives medical
treatment in the field of play. Medical report is available.
24.30 Replacement hooker for Leicester enters the match

That's it, the cold hard facts of the situation.

 
MESSAGES->author
St Marlowe (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 17:49
And your point is?



David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

 
andysaint
andysaint (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 17:50
The incident has happened, the ban is in place, the report is out, medical experts have reviewed the injury and now the time is to bring it to a close. I agree with the above the sentence should not be appealed and everyone should focus towards the end of the season. Hopefully Hawkins has no long lasting effects and his recovery is swift along with the 8-10 weeks guideline indicated.

 
Disgusted1
Disgusted1 (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 18:50
What are yer thoughts on the blatant lie Calum's defence told about his age when he committed his last red card offence? You have to wonder if they were prepared to lie about this to get the sentence reduced, what else did he lie about?

 
MESSAGES->author
ChrisG (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 19:02
Poor deluded fellow, keep coming back, keep picking away at the scab, keep trying to pick a fight when no ones interested. Mate people are just laughing at you.

 
Maverick1
Phil. (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 19:04
Quote:
Disgusted1
What are yer thoughts on the blatant lie Calum's defence told about his age when he committed his last red card offence? You have to wonder if they were prepared to lie about this to get the sentence reduced, what else did he lie about?

(Sm6)

 
Edmund Farfalla
Edmund Farfalla (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 19:08
Quote:
Disgusted1
What are yer thoughts on the blatant lie Calum's defence told about his age when he committed his last red card offence? You have to wonder if they were prepared to lie about this to get the sentence reduced, what else did he lie about?

What exactly do you want done?

CC banned for life, flogged in the middle of FG at half time in the last match then hung,drawn and quartered at pooh corner?

 
MESSAGES->author
ChrisG (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 19:14
It would be Thomond Park or Ravenhill, I can't remember which province he last claimed to support Edmund.

 
MESSAGES->author
desbralass (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 19:20
Yaaaaawn.



Bridesmaids no more.

 
walks10
walks10 (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 19:54
he's a young lad who went a bit over the top and i refuse to believe there was any intent to cause harm. he was unlucky in that the circumstances contributed to an injury and will pay the price. not playing for that length of time when you have international aspirations is going to crucify him. the ban is excessive IMO and i'm quite glad i dont live in the perfect world of the self righteous one off posters who have never erred.

 
the plastic paddy
the plastic paddy (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 20:03
I hope saints do not appeal. Callum Clark is going to have a hard enough job attempting to rehabilitate himself in the face of the inevitable taunts and provocations without the club prolonging the agony.

Callum Clark is a young man who has lost his temper and done something stupid. Any of us who have played the game will have done something stupid on a rugby field. Maybe we didn't lose our tempers as much/ weren't so strong to be able to cause such damage but at 22 years of age I think the fella deserves another chance.

I would have liked to have seen him banned for the full 64 weeks but the judgement has been made and this is where we are. Firstly, I hope Rob Hawkins enjoys a full recovery, I am sure no rugby fan could wish for anything else. But I also hope that Callum Clark comes back to play the game after quietly serving his sentence and has a long and successful career (although not against Munster or Ireland!?!). All the best to ye for the rest of the season although Bull's brother being at Exeter ye know who I will be shouting for in a couple of weeks.

 
irthlingboroughsaint

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 20:06
Can everyone please note, we, COYS, did not sit on the tribunal, we did not issue the verdict.
Also, no one here has said anything but what CC did is wrong.
If you have a problem with the ruling, ban or anything else then here is not really the place to complain, if you really do feel as strongly as you say, then you should complain to the authorities concerned.
Continually returning here to complain just shows that you really don't care, you just like people to think that you do.
Please, do us all a favour........



/*
Its all about interpretation, I'm right everyone else is interpreting it incorrectly!
*/

 
Tigergeezer
Tigergeezer (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 21:37
At the risk of talking (typing) out of turn here, I've read through the judgment a second time and am still of the view that it's pretty well measured and not an unfair take on the whole set of circumstances. There are all manner of considerations in play, and while you could quibble with a bunch of things, overall it feels fair to me, and it's decently reasoned through. I'd like Saints not to appeal this, not because they wouldn't be able to make a ground for having a pop (they could IMHO on grounds of novelty and lack of real precedent), but because I reckon this splits the diff and comes out basically in the right place, and we all need to get on with the rest, and Clark can get on with putting his right head on.



_____________________________________________

See that girl
Watch her scream
Kicking the dancing queen

 
MESSAGES->author
ChrisG (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 21:43
Well said Sir

 
Sometime lurker
Sometime lurker (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 21:46
Ok.....

I may regret this, but this is my one and only comment on the subject.

As a Saints fan, I have trouble reconciling Calum's account of events with what you can see and hear on the video. They do not appear to match.

That said, I can see how he may have acted, without the intention to break Hawkin's arm; a ruck is a fluid situation.

Then we come to the judgement. If the act was unintentional then why the long ban? Remember, this is a 64 week ban reduced to 32 of an act that was apparently unintentional - i.e. 64 weeks for what Blackett apparently decided was an "accident"

As with almost all of the hanging judges "judgements", the verdict seems unrelated to the evidence, and the sentence unrelated to the verdict.

 
MESSAGES->author
Howlin (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 21:47
Please note I said in my previous post "right minded people" Clearly this does not apply to everybody. I do wonder how some people sleep at night with so many injustices to stew over. It would be funny if it wasn't oh so very sad.



Saint til I die

 
St ann
St ann (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 22:02
I think some people are getting in a bit of a lather about the intent element. In many legal situations there are levels of intent and HHJ Blackett addresses this:
"The Player clearly intended to pull Hawkins’ arm backwards after the whistle had been blown so that the ball became available and his side could play the ball quickly. I accept that he did not intend to harm Hawkins or cause him injury. I come to that conclusion because the Player is not known as one who commits foul play, and by the way he presented and expressed himself at the hearing. He is not a thug and presented as a genuine young man who was prepared to, and accepted, responsibility for his actions and their consequences."

In essence - CC intended to pull Hawkin's arms backwards but did not intend to injure him.

I am sure we have all said and done things with one intent which has led to another conclusion altogether; one which we never intended......or is that just me?

 
MESSAGES->author
St Marlowe (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 22:37
In spite of what Eif asserts in the other thread, the whole judgement turns on intent, as does much law (frame a lawyer)

Hizzzoner is not known as the hanging judge for nothing, and I have moaned about his judgements in the past. I have to say, however that this is a very lucid and balanced report, easy to read,and if Sometime Lurker cannot reconcile the Judge's take on the evidence of the person and the camera (and please be aware, the camera very often tells less that the full truth as it is not a 3 or 4D provider) then that is for him to live with.

Any lawyer will tell you, especially those that watch too much TV, that a good judge will get more truth out of a human being that any amount of video. They have the ability to question people and judge (gedditt?) their answers. I would find it hard to dissemble in that environment in front of that judge, and I have sold some rubbish to some clever people in my time!



David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

 
MESSAGES->author
Monkey1 (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 22:53
I have to admit that initially I thought the judgement was a stitch up to make Calum available for the autumn international games. Having read the report today I am happy that a). it ties up with the videos that we have all been able to watch, and b). that the punishment has been calculated in a reasonable way.

Now it is time to wish Hawkins a speedy recovery, and for Clark to learn to think more about possible consequences of what he does on the pitch.

The one obvious point that seems to emerge from today's report is that younger players may not be aware of the consequences that can arise from use of the enormous strength that they develop as professional players these days. We have to accept Calum's word that he honestly thought that he could move Hawkins out of the way in this manner. He accepts that he knew immediately what he had done, but after that it all went pear shaped. I am 47 years old, if I screw up I face up to it immediately & try to deal with the consequences before anybody else has to do it for me. At Calum's age however, I too would have thought "oh sh^t" and not knowing the right thing to do would have fumbled on waiting for the situation to catch up with me. These are professional rugby players, but they are also young men who make the same sort of mistakes that we all did at that age.

If the RFU can learn anything from this, it is that young players are trained up to be physically strong & aggressive winners by nature, and none of us can deny that this is the combination we want to see on the pitch. Perhaps there should be training for all developing players to appreciate the serious harm that can be caused by these qualities if used incorrectly. I believe that Calum would not have attempted this action had he been aware that he was capable of wrenching a joint apart instead of just moving a player out of the way.

I am not a Saints supporter so I am not sticking up for Calum as my default setting. When I first saw what he had done with the appearance of it having been a deliberate act, I took the view that he should be banned for life, and indeed anybody doing something like this with deliberate intent and knowledge of the possible consequences should be banned for life from all sports. Having read the considered report & again watched the video evidence however, I am left with the feeling that an incident such as this was inevitable, and that it has been caused because something is missing from player development.

Calum has 32 weeks away from competitive rugby. With a bit of support maybe he could use that time to stop something similar happening to another player like Hawkins, and to another player like Clark.

Just a thought.

 
MESSAGES->author
St Marlowe (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 23:12
A good thought Monkey1.

It won't hit the press, but you can be assured that Callum will not just be told to go and have a holiday. The club will work to help him bring his demons under control.

You raise a good point about strength. One of our number is a martial arts high panjandrum ( not sure where belts fit in all that, but he is an instructor and very experienced) His concern is that ALL the clubs teach a measure of MMA as it covers wider than holds and hits and assists with balance and timing.

However it is one thing to learn how to make a hold and quite another to understand the effect of that hold beyond initial compliance. In his words "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing", and perhaps more thought needs to go into the wisdom and breadth of such teaching.



David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 30/03/2012 23:25 by St Marlowe.

 
MESSAGES->author
Monkey1 (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
30 March, 2012 23:21
Quote:
St Marlowe
His concern is that ALL the clubs teach a measure of MMA as it covers wider than holds and hits and asset with balance and timing.

Exactly the type of thought that got me thinking in the direction that young players need training beyond the sort of training that makes them winners on the pitch, you just put it in a lot fewer words than I managed.

 
MESSAGES->author
desbralass (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
31 March, 2012 07:47
Maybe some good can,after all come from this less than pleasant situation.CC will hopefully come through this a better man and player.Hopefully Mr Hawkins will make a full recovery.I enjoyed reading your post,Monkey1...food for thought.



Bridesmaids no more.

 
MESSAGES->author
Bob Stainsby (IP Logged)

Re: Clark Report
31 March, 2012 09:31
Well what a change (with the exception of DisCusturd and the odd other) see some thoughtful and reasoned posts after the outpouring of righteous indignation and bile of one of the worst threads I have ever seen in 10+ years of reading these forums.
As with almost every Saints supporter I have seen, heard, spoken to, all agree CC did wrong and must be punished but I wanted to read the judgement in full before commenting. Having read HJJB report I see it as fair and just something I asked for in my only post shortly after his citing. Like others and Paul's (Flatt) excellent posting I too hope CC does go and do something usefull and reflect and come back a better man. I also hope Saints don't appeal the sentence.

Finally for the dweeb who searched the archives to find ONE incident on YouTube from 5+ years ago to prove 'previous' get a life!



2013/14 Aviva Premiership Champions 2013/14 Amlin cup winners

 
Re: Clark Report
31 March, 2012 10:45
Ask yourself what Calum is feeling right now, and probably from the moment it happened (Quote Calum: "I played the rest of the game in a fog"). Guilt, remorse, shame...

Now look at what 32 weeks actually means, not just in terms of time:

1 - Run-in to, and the playoffs - a 25% chance of a premiership winners medal
2 - Summer Tour place to South Africa
3 - A place in the EPS for the autumn internationals next season
4 - 32 weeks of watching a number of players replace him in the shop windows of Club and Country
5 - The helpless feeling that you are a contracted player but have no capacity to help your team-mates for 8 months; that's a heavy burden to weigh on your mind for so long
6 - The tar and feather job that the likes of Barnes, Morris and the media at large will be enjoying from this point on and even more so when the ban ends; 'the return of...'

All this, and probably more that I've missed off the top of my head, and still people say it's inadequate. Sorry folks, but piano wire is not a commodity that's passed around freely. I hope that as Calum gets plenty of time to reflect, that maybe some of us should do the same.



Ginger - The Colour of Sexual Rejection

 
Re: Clark Report
31 March, 2012 13:07
Quote:
St Marlowe
A good thought Monkey1.
It won't hit the press, but you can be assured that Callum will not just be told to go and have a holiday. The club will work to help him bring his demons under control.

You raise a good point about strength. One of our number is a martial arts high panjandrum ( not sure where belts fit in all that, but he is an instructor and very experienced) His concern is that ALL the clubs teach a measure of MMA as it covers wider than holds and hits and assists with balance and timing.

However it is one thing to learn how to make a hold and quite another to understand the effect of that hold beyond initial compliance. In his words "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing", and perhaps more thought needs to go into the wisdom and breadth of such teaching.


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?