Digby banned for five weeks

[barbarian]

Thought I'd start a new thread, bound to be a fair bit of reaction to what was a pretty harsh decision in my view.

 

[Tangawizi]

5 weeks? You're fucking joking?!

 

[RedsHappy]

Remind me someone please: how long was QC (Quade Cooper) out for his similar offence?

If I'm not mistaken, this means that precedents mean little and we have a vast range of ban periods with little explicable consistency.

There will almost certainly be a robust appeal from the QRU.

 

[Scotty]

I will only be surprised when the judiciary is actually consistent. Inconsistency is the norm.

 

[AngrySeahorse]

Wow, I thought 2 weeks at the absolute max. 5wks I would have thought would be spear tackle territory. Reds fans have every right to be mad, if it were my team I'd be pissed off.

 

[qwerty51]

Ioane's original 8-wk ban (with loading for priors) reduced by 3 wks for early plea/ contrition. means he misses only 4 games due to a bye.

 

[Braveheart81]

Is there really much difference in the angle the player gets to between Digby's tackle and the tackle on AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) against the Highlanders?

I think 5 weeks is harsh on Diggers, but some suspension was probably warranted. I think the tackle on AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) was worth a similar suspension though.

 

[qwerty51]

Especially as AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)'s one wasn't even given a penalty. I'll say it again but clearly how the attacker is impacted affects the punishment.

 

[Elfster]

Does anyone have video of the incident? For 8 weeks, it must have been a fairly atrocious tackle: people have gouged, head-butted, dislocated touring Irishmen's shoulders and received far less.

 

[RedsHappy]

BH, thanks, great vid work.

Shows how mindbogglingly inconsistent is both the policing, and penalty banning period system.

 

[Elfster]

Oops...missed the video posting whilst posting mine.

There was an earlier post in another thread about the increasing prevalence of these tackles...even with the rather consistently harsh (or at least until this ban) responses by the refs - a 10 minute spell in the bin.

As the tackles have continued in spite of the sin binnings, perhaps the powers that be have decided to ramp up the punishment and Digby is the first person to be on the end of it.

As long as there is consistency applied to all players and subsequent similar events it may be explained away that way. And could even be justified, as dangerous play is not acceptable.

 

[Ignoto]

Farking hell, how does that work?

Surely you would appeal that decision because that's a joke he was suspended originally for 8 weeks with a reduction.

 

[RedsHappy]

I will only be surprised when the judiciary is actually consistent. Inconsistency is the norm.

Then that's not 'a judiciary' worth its name. Consistency and transparency are the hallmarks of any half-decent laws' policing system that aims to create both legitimacy and respect, let alone the demonstration of natural justice.

 

[Dan54]

well, I did say in here I thought it would be 4 weeks. And I didn't realise he had priors. I actually think it a 2 week one myself, but they getting really upset on these, especially where he driven down on top of player. It's not the lifting they don't like , it's taking player past vertical, which is why I don't think anything happened with AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) one.

 

[Dumbledore]

Time to get the armbands out boys. Justice4Digby.

 

[Troy]

Gobsmacked! Didn't expect that..Not 8 weeks that is..

Does that mean they can still appeal and it may be reduced further? Or because it's already reduced the appeal process is over?

 

[RedsHappy]

Gobsmacked! Didn't expect that..Not 8 weeks that is..

Does that mean they can still appeal and it may be reduced further? Or because it's already reduced the appeal process is over?

There's probably 4 volumnious manuals that deal with that, and two international committees to consult, and we'll find out in July.

 

[Dan54]

I would think they would just take the 4 weeks and leave it, like I said he has come down on top of player, which is considered driving him down, so he won't get any lighter.

 

[Scotty]

well, I did say in here I thought it would be 4 weeks. And I didn't realise he had priors. I actually think it a 2 week one myself, but they getting really upset on these, especially where he driven down on top of player. It's not the lifting they don't like , it's taking player past vertical, which is why I don't think anything happened with AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) one.

How do you not take a player past vertical when you lift them. If you mean past horizontal - it must have only been marginal and it is often difficult for the tackler alone to determine this result. Surely if you want to rub it out, you just stop all lifting in the tackle?

 

[Tiger]

Looked to me like AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) was taken past horizontal...