Rugby World Cup general discussion
-
It's always interesting to see which ref got appointed for the other big pool games.
England v Argentina - Mathieu Raynal (FFR)
South Africa v Scotland - Angus Gardner (RA)
South Africa v Ireland - Ben O'Keeffe (NZR)
Wales v Australia - Wayne Barnes (RFU)
Ireland v Scotland - Nic Berry (RA) -
Well if anything it's introduced delicious Boer sausages to a brand new group of consumers. That's a clear win in my view.
-
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
-
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
astonished that the shoulder charge was interpreted initially as a tackle. Right outcome in the end.
Edit: and now waiting on Billy V - could be tonight NZT
-
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
A common apologist argument online is that the panel is independent so the IRB have no control. I can't believe that is the case, surely they have the power to set the parameters of how these panels operate, and give guidance re-decisions (not case by case, but they must set some guidelines). All the outrage could have been avoided if the panel had done the right thing in the first place. Another own goal from the drop kicks at World Rugby.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
A common apologist argument online is that the panel is independent so the IRB have no control. I can't believe that is the case, surely they have the power to set the parameters of how these panels operate, and give guidance re-decisions (not case by case, but they must set some guidelines). All the outrage could have been avoided if the panel had done the right thing in the first place. Another own goal from the drop kicks at World Rugby.
@canefan amd they do, different grad offensives have starting points and the panel has to justify any reduction....its baffling how the original one came to their decision! good on WR for coming in and sorting, even if it was only due to the almost universal outcry
-
@canefan amd they do, different grad offensives have starting points and the panel has to justify any reduction....its baffling how the original one came to their decision! good on WR for coming in and sorting, even if it was only due to the almost universal outcry
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
@canefan amd they do, different grad offensives have starting points and the panel has to justify any reduction....its baffling how the original one came to their decision! good on WR for coming in and sorting, even if it was only due to the almost universal outcry
You always look better if it appears that action was your idea!! The way they let it play out, it makes WR look like they only took action in response to the outrage
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
@canefan amd they do, different grad offensives have starting points and the panel has to justify any reduction....its baffling how the original one came to their decision! good on WR for coming in and sorting, even if it was only due to the almost universal outcry
You always look better if it appears that action was your idea!! The way they let it play out, it makes WR look like they only took action in response to the outrage
@canefan i honestly believe no one including WR thought he would get off completely, i think if anything WR has taken a harsh or conservative stance on a lot of these matters, harsher than i would be anyone for things that are actual accidents for example
-
@canefan i honestly believe no one including WR thought he would get off completely, i think if anything WR has taken a harsh or conservative stance on a lot of these matters, harsher than i would be anyone for things that are actual accidents for example
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
@canefan i honestly believe no one including WR thought he would get off completely, i think if anything WR has taken a harsh or conservative stance on a lot of these matters, harsher than i would be anyone for things that are actual accidents for example
Harsh when it came to Moala, among others. The optics are terrible with Farrell's case
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
@canefan i honestly believe no one including WR thought he would get off completely, i think if anything WR has taken a harsh or conservative stance on a lot of these matters, harsher than i would be anyone for things that are actual accidents for example
Harsh when it came to Moala, among others. The optics are terrible with Farrell's case
@canefan the more i think about it the more i do wonder if something corrupt went on, getting cleared for that tackle when other people get bans for complete accidents seems impossible
-
wonder if Farrells lawyer will appeal or they will just leave it at this?
Part of me wants them to appeal to show the system up for being flawed to hopefully (yeah right) improve it.
-
@canefan the more i think about it the more i do wonder if something corrupt went on, getting cleared for that tackle when other people get bans for complete accidents seems impossible
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
@canefan the more i think about it the more i do wonder if something corrupt went on, getting cleared for that tackle when other people get bans for complete accidents seems impossible
Yup - my first reaction to the down grading was that it reeked of corruption and I have seen nothing from todays decision to change my mind.... case and point below
"player’s acceptance of foul play," was seen as mitigation -- acceptance my arse - he pleaded not guilty and contested it blatantly .. at no stage has he accepted it was foul play - these are just weasel words to justify doing the bare possible minimum.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
@canefan the more i think about it the more i do wonder if something corrupt went on, getting cleared for that tackle when other people get bans for complete accidents seems impossible
Yup - my first reaction to the down grading was that it reeked of corruption and I have seen nothing from todays decision to change my mind.... case and point below
"player’s acceptance of foul play," was seen as mitigation -- acceptance my arse - he pleaded not guilty and contested it blatantly .. at no stage has he accepted it was foul play - these are just weasel words to justify doing the bare possible minimum.
@Mattasaurus hope he also showed remorse this week, now he has seen the it form a new angle to know that he done wrong!
-
@Mattasaurus hope he also showed remorse this week, now he has seen the it form a new angle to know that he done wrong!
@taniwharugby said in Rugby World Cup news:
@Mattasaurus hope he also showed remorse this week, now he has seen the it form a new angle to know that he done wrong!
I'm sure he got to see it the first time around, any remorse now will seem forced
-
@taniwharugby said in Rugby World Cup news:
@Mattasaurus hope he also showed remorse this week, now he has seen the it form a new angle to know that he done wrong!
I'm sure he got to see it the first time around, any remorse now will seem forced
@canefan said in Rugby World Cup news:
@taniwharugby said in Rugby World Cup news:
@Mattasaurus hope he also showed remorse this week, now he has seen the it form a new angle to know that he done wrong!
I'm sure he got to see it the first time around, any remorse now will seem forced
-
@taniwharugby said in Rugby World Cup news:
@Mattasaurus hope he also showed remorse this week, now he has seen the it form a new angle to know that he done wrong!
I'm sure he got to see it the first time around, any remorse now will seem forced
@canefan was tongue in cheek comment, most 'remorse' is usually feigned to reduce sentencing (IRL too)
-
@Mattasaurus hope he also showed remorse this week, now he has seen the it form a new angle to know that he done wrong!
@taniwharugby the "new angle" being that the RFU lawyer sat him down to explain that the jig is up, and if can say sorry with a straight face then they might be able to get it down to 4 weeks
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
A common apologist argument online is that the panel is independent so the IRB have no control. I can't believe that is the case, surely they have the power to set the parameters of how these panels operate, and give guidance re-decisions (not case by case, but they must set some guidelines). All the outrage could have been avoided if the panel had done the right thing in the first place. Another own goal from the drop kicks at World Rugby.
@canefan said in Rugby World Cup news:
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
A common apologist argument online is that the panel is independent so the IRB have no control. I can't believe that is the case, surely they have the power to set the parameters of how these panels operate, and give guidance re-decisions (not case by case, but they must set some guidelines). All the outrage could have been avoided if the panel had done the right thing in the first place. Another own goal from the drop kicks at World Rugby.
It's not an apologist argument. The panel is independent.
The guidance is in Regulation 17, which is clearly explained here.
https://www.world.rugby/organisation/governance/discipline
I can't believe that anyone on the Fern still doesn't know this.
These guidelines apply to all processes, so even in case of disciplanry proceedings taking place after offending in a game that falls under the Six Nations or SANZAAR rather than World Rugby.
-
@canefan said in Rugby World Cup news:
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
A common apologist argument online is that the panel is independent so the IRB have no control. I can't believe that is the case, surely they have the power to set the parameters of how these panels operate, and give guidance re-decisions (not case by case, but they must set some guidelines). All the outrage could have been avoided if the panel had done the right thing in the first place. Another own goal from the drop kicks at World Rugby.
It's not an apologist argument. The panel is independent.
The guidance is in Regulation 17, which is clearly explained here.
https://www.world.rugby/organisation/governance/discipline
I can't believe that anyone on the Fern still doesn't know this.
These guidelines apply to all processes, so even in case of disciplanry proceedings taking place after offending in a game that falls under the Six Nations or SANZAAR rather than World Rugby.
@Stargazer said in Rugby World Cup news:
@canefan said in Rugby World Cup news:
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
A common apologist argument online is that the panel is independent so the IRB have no control. I can't believe that is the case, surely they have the power to set the parameters of how these panels operate, and give guidance re-decisions (not case by case, but they must set some guidelines). All the outrage could have been avoided if the panel had done the right thing in the first place. Another own goal from the drop kicks at World Rugby.
It's not an apologist argument. The panel is independent.
The guidance is in Regulation 17, which is clearly explained here.
https://www.world.rugby/organisation/governance/discipline
I can't believe that anyone on the Fern still doesn't know this.
These guidelines apply to all processes, so even in case of disciplanry proceedings taking place after offending in a game that falls under the Six Nations or SANZAAR rather than World Rugby.
Well something reeks about that initial decision, independent or not
-
@canefan said in Rugby World Cup news:
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby World Cup news:
so, farrell got 4 weeks and will miss a couple of englands RWC games
A common apologist argument online is that the panel is independent so the IRB have no control. I can't believe that is the case, surely they have the power to set the parameters of how these panels operate, and give guidance re-decisions (not case by case, but they must set some guidelines). All the outrage could have been avoided if the panel had done the right thing in the first place. Another own goal from the drop kicks at World Rugby.
It's not an apologist argument. The panel is independent.
The guidance is in Regulation 17, which is clearly explained here.
https://www.world.rugby/organisation/governance/discipline
I can't believe that anyone on the Fern still doesn't know this.
These guidelines apply to all processes, so even in case of disciplanry proceedings taking place after offending in a game that falls under the Six Nations or SANZAAR rather than World Rugby.
@Stargazer you're right that the panel is independent, but @canefan is right that this mess could have been avoided if the panel had done their job properly first time around (or, even better, if Farrell had decided not to be a grub in the first place)
