Blues 2022
-
St Kents had players from all over the NI, and often the best from other Auckland schools for their last couple of years of schooling. That has helped.
http://stats.allblacks.com/asp/schoollist.asp?sl_id=St Kentigern College&stats_id=71
Christie has his own link (due to spelling).
http://stats.allblacks.com/asp/schoollist.asp?sl_id=St Kentigern's College&stats_id=71
-
Caleb Clarke suspended for three weeks (up to and including 23 April 2022)
https://twitter.com/SaffasRugby/status/1510157632052596737
Here's the official SANZAAR media release: -
Caleb Clarke suspended for three weeks (up to and including 23 April 2022)
https://twitter.com/SaffasRugby/status/1510157632052596737
Here's the official SANZAAR media release:@stargazer so no clarification, just a punishment for clouting an attacker...
SANZAAR really is useless.
-
@stargazer so no clarification, just a punishment for clouting an attacker...
SANZAAR really is useless.
@antipodean It's unfortunate that SANZAAR only publishes media releases and not the full decisions, like World Rugby does.
-
Caleb Clarke suspended for three weeks (up to and including 23 April 2022)
https://twitter.com/SaffasRugby/status/1510157632052596737
Here's the official SANZAAR media release: -
@stargazer young age is now a basis to reduce bans.
FML.
@nzzp Yeah, it's strange. I can see inexperience as a basis for reduction, but Clarke has plenty of experience, including at the highest level.
He also didn't admit to any wrongdoing (no "his acceptance of foul play" in the reasoning) and contested the allegations; in most cases that means that you get one week less reduction (so a 4 week-ban). It's not impossible that they might have considered reducing the penalty more than 50% (for example to two weeks) if he had accepted the citing.
-
@nzzp Yeah, it's strange. I can see inexperience as a basis for reduction, but Clarke has plenty of experience, including at the highest level.
He also didn't admit to any wrongdoing (no "his acceptance of foul play" in the reasoning) and contested the allegations; in most cases that means that you get one week less reduction (so a 4 week-ban). It's not impossible that they might have considered reducing the penalty more than 50% (for example to two weeks) if he had accepted the citing.
@stargazer said in Blues 2022:
@nzzp Yeah, it's strange. I can see inexperience as a basis for reduction, but Clarke has plenty of experience, including at the highest level.
He also didn't admit to any wrongdoing (no "his acceptance of foul play" in the reasoning) and contested the allegations; in most cases that means that you get one week less reduction (so a 4 week-ban). It's not impossible that they might have considered reducing the penalty more than 50% (for example to two weeks) if he had accepted the citing.
These things just give the appearance of being 'what do we reckon is fair considering the act and the person'? Then they retrofit some justification through the guidelines.
-
@kiwimurph said in Blues 2022:
Luatua was MAGS.
I was just coming to post that - he played with my cousin.
Edit: Was he was poached at some point? I don't remember it @Dice
-
@kiwimurph said in Blues 2022:
Luatua was MAGS.
I was just coming to post that - he played with my cousin.
Edit: Was he was poached at some point? I don't remember it @Dice
@gt12 said in Blues 2022:
@kiwimurph said in Blues 2022:
Luatua was MAGS.
I was just coming to post that - he played with my cousin.
Edit: Was he was poached at some point? I don't remember it @Dice
that ABs profile is plain wrong then.
Also, he's only 30. Would walk into the team these days
-
Sanzaar has failed to differentiate between Clarkeâs blow, and that landed by team-mate Nepo Laulala against the same opponents four days earlier when his shoulder connected with Moana Pasifika centre Fine Inisiâs head in a breakdown, and also drew a red. Both players were meted out three-week bans, and that, say the Blues, is just fine by them. âWe appreciate what World Rugby are doing, really emphasising keeping players safe,â Blues assistant coach Daniel Halangahu told a media posse after Thursdayâs training at Alexandra Park. âWe went in there hopeful. You could see there was no intent and we all know Caleb is a warm, loving young man, and never intended for anything to happen. But unfortunately it did.â Asked if the ban was fair, Halangahu said the Bluesâ view was that it was. âThe framework is pretty clear and theyâve applied it,â said the attack coach. âWeâre getting consistency now. There has been a shift over the last few years and thatâs because of the injuries sustained. Weâre really clear on whatâs OK and not OK. Caleb got it wrong, he accepts he got it wrong, and itâs just the degree of how he got it wrong is where weâre at.â That supportive view extended to the framework of how head contact offences were viewed. âWe support keeping players safe, so weâve got to adjust how we do things,â Halangahu added. âObviously in those two incidents we got it wrong, so weâll work on changing some behaviour and technique.â Halangahu did concede Clarkeâs offence had been almost âuniqueâ in its nature â though still a reminder that ultimately the duty of care lay with players making challenges. âCaleb was attempting to keep the player safe, and thatâs the reason he had the angle across the kicker. But he still made contact, so itâs understanding the exact scenario where we probably canât leave our feet and get into that space. âWeâve got to keep the safety of the person kicking the ball at front of mind. If we canât execute that charge-down and still keep that person safe, weâre going to have to adjust our technique.â
