Search results

Thanks mate. I started to get a bit more fired up than I intended to...probably around 4.30am this morning!! ;)

I'm not sure about the contradictory details but the IRB required merits for appointmenst seem pretty common-sense and fair: Is there anything in there that doesn't seem fair or looks unreasonable?

Honestly, I wish people had taken some time to actually read the Laws and actually looked at the process the IRB was following rather than slagging them off instinctively, jumping on the IRB conspiracy theories. From @GaffaCHinO's post above: Again - it seems that the appeal has a stronger...

Not for mine. Do I think he should of got suspended? Yes. But the correct processes and Laws were followed and it's come to this conclusion. It's like an actual game of rugby really - you win some and you lose some but at the end of the day, it's just a game :)

This looks to be decided upon, again, by the Host union. If nothing else, this whole drama has been great for me personally. Now I have a much better understanding of how the judiciary/disciplinary/appeals processes and appointments etc are all done. The old IRB-conspiracy theories are hard...

Thanks for sharing that......great insight!

Farrell probably should have been cited. Again, no IRB intervention. The ARU appoint the Citing Commissioner for each match. I haven't looked throughly for it but I'm not sure that the IRB are allowed themslves to cite a player.

I got it here: http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/0/regulation17090730_8711.pdf

Can't see how the ARU can look to legally challenge the IRB based on the nationality of the Appeal Officer if the Regulations have been followed: It would seem that the ARU would have appointed Mews, not the IRB.

Here's something on the Adam Thompson case that may shed some light on the IRB's stance here. If you have time, go and take a look at what the IRB Discplinary Laws and Regulations are to get a look at how the judicial, discplinary and appeal officers etc are appointed and how the Thompson case...

Lindommer, have you read the Laws in regards to this?

Except that Horwill isn't actually being charged again. The IRB are appealing the decision made by the judicial officer which they are entitled to do under the Laws of the game. In some respect, it it seems to me that it is actually the judicial officer's decision that is on trial. From what...

Fuck I wish had as well!! LOL

Fair call mate and I apologise.

I've never said he stomped on 3 peoples heads. There is footage of two incidents and he received an off-field yellow for stamping a 3rd person.

In the case of So'oialo, even Strauss accepted that there was maliciousness in the incident and it was probably an accident. Strauss also didn't receive an injury from the incident unlike AWJ. This is also the firdt time So'oialo has done this - unlike Horwill. I dae say if So'oialo does it...

Josh, if you think stamping (as Horwill has done) or even 'stepping' on someone's head is part of the game, you really don't know how to play rugby and neither does your mate. And even if I give you Farrell's alleged one on Lucas, who was the 2nd person he's stamped on recently? This is...

Now that's an argument I can take seriously! Not being South African, I guess it's hard for us to understand how much Nelson Mandela means to them. He radically changed their world and had such a massive impact (as opposed to just an affect ;)) not just on a broad country-wide level but on an...

LOL.....I'm fine. I'm not copping anything anywhere. The ability to actually read and comprehend puts me a step above people like you although it gets a little draining having to lay it all out in basic terms and in small steps so you can keep up. But I don't hold it against you at all.

While I understand why you would want to keep things basic, the two words have quite different connotations and can convey quite a different meaning to each other.