Cooper appeal rejected

[El Barto]

Wallabies playmaker Quade Cooper has failed in his bid to have his Tri Nations suspension overturned, and will still miss two matches.

Following a five-hour hearing, the three SANZAR judicial officers stood by the initial penalty for his dangerous tackle in last weekend's 30-13 win over South Africa.

Born in New Zealand's Waikato province, Cooper must now hope he can break back into Australia's team to make his first-ever appearance against his homeland in Sydney in September.

"I'm obviously pretty disappointed but at the same time we had a fair appeal," he said.

"All I can do from here is work hard and concentrate on getting back out there at the due date.

"You have to learn from it. Hopefully I don't get into this position again so I have to work on my technique."

His loss remains a massive blow for the Wallabies as he has been their most dangerous player in their opening five Tests this year, winning two man-of-the-match awards.

The Wallabies had hoped that they would at least have Cooper's ban reduced to one match -Saturday's Bledisloe Cup game against New Zealand --which would have made him available for the following week's return encounter in Christchurch.

Cooper had been suspended following a citing for a dangerous tip tackle in the 54th minute of the Test which was won by Australia 30 – 13.

The Appeals Committee was comprised of Peter Hobbs (New Zealand), Terry Willis (Australia) and Peter Ingwersen (South Africa).

The player’s appeal was based on interpretations of rugby laws, their application in this case, and whether the subsequent penalty imposed was appropriate.

Appeals Committee Chairman Peter Hobbs said the committee considered the judicial officer’s original decision, all the evidence put before him including the video footage, and the appeal submissions made on Cooper’s behalf.

The decision is a particularly disappointing blow for the New Zealand-born Cooper, who is yet to play a Test against the All Blacks.

 

[JJJ]

One short article and they manage to mention that he was born in NZ 3 times. What's up with that?

 

[biggsy]

Nothing in the tackle... I think Stain sorry Steyn should harden up. Stain made it look worse than it was... Great now Barnes Cant stand barnes, the best thing about him was when he left the REDS.. Now Sat night from Barnes kick kick kick kick kick kick kick kick pass kick kick kick. What a joke go back to the NRL...

 

[PaarlBok]

Nothing in the tackle... I think Stain sorry Steyn should harden up. Stain made it look worse than it was... Great now Barnes Cant stand barnes, the best thing about him was when he left the REDS.. Now Sat night from Barnes kick kick kick kick kick kick kick kick pass kick kick kick. What a joke go back to the NRL...

You must be joking. The rule should be harden the vokken up.

Well triple J he is born in NZ, why do it bodder you so much? This Aussies poachers.:fishing

 

[MrTimms]

It is already here, but this is the media release.

SANZAR MEDIA RELEASE


Quade Cooper appeal dismissed by SANZAR Appeals Committee
A SANZAR Appeals Committee has dismissed an appeal by Australian first five-eighth Quade Cooper against his two-week suspension imposed after the Australia v South Africa Tri Nations Test match in Brisbane on Saturday 24 July 2010.

Cooper had been suspended following a citing for a dangerous tip tackle in the 54th minute of the Test which was won by Australia 30 – 13.

The Appeals Committee was comprised of Peter Hobbs (New Zealand), Terry Willis (Australia) and Peter Ingwersen (South Africa).

The player’s appeal was based on interpretations of rugby laws, their application in this case, and whether the subsequent penalty imposed was appropriate.

Appeals Committee Chairman Peter Hobbs said the committee considered the judicial officer’s original decision, all the evidence put before him including the video footage, and the appeal submissions made on Cooper’s behalf.

Mr Hobbs said the arguments on Cooper’s behalf were comprehensive and complex and required careful and thorough consideration of IRB Regulation 17, the laws of the game, and Cooper’s grounds for appeal.

After a lengthy teleconference hearing, and deliberations, the committee dismissed the appeal.

Quade Cooper’s original suspension imposed by the judicial officer stands and he remains ineligible for selection for two weeks up to including Sunday 8 August 2010.

- Ends -

Issued by SANZAR

 

[Richo]

This is the SANZAR definition of consistency:

JdV: one Test, one Currie.
Fourie: one Test, two Curries.
Cooper: two Tests.

As has been discussed elsewhere, the system doesn't work. It's a joke. Should be a "games at that level" ban for this kind of "in the course of play" offense and "games at every level" for a Bakkies-style sin.

 

[Muttonbird]

This is the SANZAR definition of consistency:

JdV: one Test, one Currie.
Fourie: one Test, two Curries.
Cooper: two Tests.

As has been discussed elsewhere, the system doesn't work. It's a joke. Should be a "games at that level" ban for this kind of "in the course of play" offense and "games at every level" for a Bakkies-style sin.

The more complicated the punishment system gets, the more chance of perceived bias and sentencing mistakes. They want lifting tackles out of the game so that's exactly what they are doing.

 

[Richo]

I don't think it's complicated to give out a "two Test ban" rather than a "two week ban". To make sure Fourie missed a Test, they had to give him a "four week ban". The flaws in the current system already make it complicated.

 

[Muttonbird]

I don't think it's complicated to give out a "two Test ban" rather than a "two week ban". To make sure Fourie missed a Test, they had to give him a "four week ban". The flaws in the current system already make it complicated.

I just don't think you can give a "two Test ban" and then let them play in other competitions. A ban is a ban for all games otherwise you are disadvantaging opposition teams in lower competitions and not properly punishing the player for dangerous play. Following from that, you can't ban a player for "two Tests" and not allow them to play in the interim because the next test might be next year.

I don't think they manufactured Fourie's ban to take in one test - I think he got four weeks for a similar tackle to Cooper's because he's got a dodgy history and Cooper doesn't (now he does). Fourie is just "lucky" three of the four weeks he's out are CC games and Cooper is "unlucky" because the next two weeks are Tests.

There-in lies the lesson for Cooper. Don't spear-tackle when your next two games are Bledisloe Cup matches.

 

[Scotty]

It is very difficult to make the system fair. LG's suggestion of being able to play down when banned, but not up has some merits (ie if you are banned for two tests then you miss two tests but can play all other games). In fact I was going to suggest a points system where tests are worth more than S15 that are worth more than club. But I've just thought of so many issues with that sort of system I won't post it.

 

[louie]

this makes rugby (international!) look very unprofessional. Cooper has no record and just a worse ban. bullshit. politics. JON should be going mental about this.

 

[Richo]

A ban is a ban for all games otherwise you are disadvantaging opposition teams in lower competitions and not properly punishing the player for dangerous play.

Sure, but Tests matter a lot - A LOT - more than Currie Cup games so I don't really have a problem with that. I doubt there are many players who think "Hmmm, this whole dangerous tackle ban isn't too bad -- I can still play club rugby!" when they could have been in Tri Nations.

Fourie has a history, yes, but you can bet your bottom dollar there was no way in hell -- history or no history -- that the judiciary could give him only two Currie Cup games off.

 

[Ruggo]

The system is bullshit. Maybe Quade should of made this tackle against Ireland so he missed two games for Souths. Punishment needs to be judged by the amount of test matches missed. I am not saying Qwade did not deserved to be suspended but the way the system is, it is unequitable.

Quade, please work on your technique during your time off.

 

[Richo]

+1

Eloquently put.

 

[Muttonbird]

Sure, but Tests matter a lot - A LOT - more than Currie Cup games so I don't really have a problem with that. I doubt there are many players who think "Hmmm, this whole dangerous tackle ban isn't too bad -- I can still play club rugby!" when they could have been in Tri Nations.

Fourie has a history, yes, but you can bet your bottom dollar there was no way in hell -- history or no history -- that the judiciary could give him only two Currie Cup games off.

Yep. I just think it's wierd you can dump someone on their head one week, get suspended, and play the following week.

Also, if Fourie was banned for four tests, that would take him to November sometime, 4 months away. You could then argue QC (Quade Cooper) gets two weeks out of meaningfull rugby and JF gets 14 for the same tackle.

I'm not defending the Boks here - some of their fans drive me nuts with their inflated sense of rugby entitlement.

 

[Reddy!]

Personally I think the yellow card was punishment enough, but the IRB can't go making precedents when it comes to rough conduct and foul play by letting players off the hook. I think many think the punishment is unfair because Steyn didn't get injured and was perfectly alright; what if he was injured? Different storey.

Remember the rugby pitch is a work enviroment - the ban imposed by the IRB on Fourie and Cooper was not to penalise them, but to ensure the safety of players on the field.

 

[louie]

if your banned for a tackle that's taken place in a test then you should be banded from playing at that level.

Club rugby is club rugby. Tests are test.

It'll stop players from breaks the laws.

i'm also of the opinion that if you have a number of yellows (3 etc) you should have to serve a ban.