James Horwill cited for stamping

[USARugger]

Bullrush

They didn't overturn a ruling with Adam Thomson - this is 100% different.

I don't think they should have intervened in any case but comparing a sentence extension to an overturning of a verdict of innocent is just daft.

You're rapidly veering from what could have been a voice of reason to what is becoming an angry dog that yaps at anything which can be perceived as defending Horwill.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

There should be no process for overturning decisions made by IRB-sanctioned officials. Their judgement should be final as they are employed with the explicit intent of being unbiased officers upholding the established judiciary processes and punishments laid forth by the IRB itself.

This is nothing short of double jeopardy and insanely dangerous legal precedent. This is to establish a court which is higher than the established court itself but is not held to any of the standards of non-conflict which the lower court is.

Well I happen to believe that decisions in all courts of law should have the ability to be reviewed and overturned. After all those making the decisions are only human and can make errors from time to time.

That may lead me down some slippery slope to some insane land of dangerousness, but I'll cop that on the chin.

 

[USARugger]

Bruwheresmycar

How does the IRB making a mistake give them any right to prosecute a player (who they openly declared innocent by every legal precedent they have ever set) for the second time?

Double. Jeopardy.

It serves no purpose other than undermining the legitimacy of the entire judiciary process, or whatever shred of legitimacy it had left before this fiasco.

 

[Bullrush]

Bullrush

They didn't overturn a ruling with Adam Thompson - this is 100% different.

You're rapidly veering from what could have been a voice of reason to what is becoming an angry dog that yaps at anything which can be perceived as defending Horwill.

You said:

There should be no process for overturning decisions made by IRB-sanctioned officials.Their judgement should be final as they are employed with the explicit intent of being unbiased officers upholding the established judiciary processes and punishments laid forth by the IRB itself.

Adam Thompson was judged by IRB-sanctioned officials. By your own words, the IRB should have upheld that process and the punishment. By your own words here, the IRB-sanctioned officials' judgement should have been final.

The precedent has already been set but none of you guys were too fussed about it when it didn't involve a Wallaby captain.

 

[USARugger]

Check my post again.

Thomson was given leniency (after being found guilty) by an IRB-sanctioned officer in lieu of the established punishment for his offense and the IRB intervened to uphold the minimum punishment for stamping.

Horwill was declared innocent by an IRB-sanctioned officer and now the IRB is overturning the ruling entirely.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

Next time someone goes to the judiciary for a similar act of foul play they can say "well in Horwill vs the IRB, you guys ruled him not guilty due to lack of evidence for intent, hence the act can't be ruled reckless and doesn't warrant a suspension".

The IRB has lots of people to answer to from insurers, to doctors to the players association/s. If they can't afford to have the game ruled from this perspective and they think the ruling goes against their guidelines, they will get the decision professionally reviewed.

I really don't need to go into any more depth to explain this school of thought. You might disagree and think I'm missing something obvious, but from what I know this is how successful and transparent sporting organisations run. I'm sure everyone (or more accurately, anyone) viewing this thread who cares can make up their own mind, and I'm sure they'll mostly align with your view - based on the majority of outrage we've seen in this thread.

 

[USARugger]

I have no issue with them recognizing or fixing mistakes made during the judiciary process.

But to do it at the expense of a player already declared innocent is not only unfair, but outrageous.

If they wanted to do an independent and professional review of the decision made and the precedent set by the way it was made then there are much better ways to do it.

 

[Josh123]

How many people have you stamped or stepped on their head this year Josh? If you ever play against me, you'd better make sure not to step on my head.

In under 16s, the 6 foot 6, 100kg monster from my team trampled my head. I got up and played on, cause i knew he didn't do it on purpose, and this kind of stuff happens all the time. Are you telling me next time i see him i should spit the dummy cause he must have done it on purpose?

In this case, Horwill didn't know where he was putting his foot down, so why should the past be bought back up? I'm sure there are plenty of players who this has happened too twice in a season, for some reason it doesn't seem to be bought up like it has been done for Horwill.

 

[Alex]

The righteous indignation on here is surprising for a group of blokes who claim to play the game.

We all know the rugby judiciary system lost all credibility a long time ago - it is a political farce that is a blight on a great game and needs to be fixed. Unfortunately forcing Horwill to face the judiciary twice does far more damage than it does good. It pales beside O'Connell's sickening kick to the head of David Kearney immediately before the Lions tour. I don't think O'Connell's kick was deliberate (or he should be in prison) but it was reckless on a scale that is barely comprehensible. When people are looking to cite precedents for accidental boots to the head, no one will remember Horwill 2013, but anyone who saw Kearney get kicked will never forget it.

When O'Connell does not get cited for a boot to the head like that before a lions tour (or for gouging Horgan in the corresponding game four years earlier after being named lions captain, where Quinlan did get cited for gouging Cullen), or Farrell for his boot where the recipient was stretchered off, but Horwill gets tried twice for this, the whole thing looks even more political and amateurish. This does not send a message about intolerance of recklessness on a rugby field because that ship sailed a long time ago - it does send a powerful message about who is running the IRB and how they are using their powers - and it is not one that this game needs.

For what it is worth, I have said before and I wil say again that Kev should sit out a few games, so should Farrell - and O'Connell should not be playing again this year. But this is not the right way of doing it. Set standards, educate citing officers and judiciary officials, develop standards. Judiciaries all over the world face issues with standards of guilt, burdens of proof and sentencing consistency and most get it wrong, but few get it wrong on the scale that the IRB does. For a sport that is supposedly the domain of private school educated lawyers the irony is not lost.

If Kev misses next week under these circumstances he just becomes a matyr for the wallabies. Eejits.

 

[the plastic paddy]

You'd better be able to show some evidence of Paulie gouging because otherwise that is a disgraceful slur on a great player.

 

[Bullrush]

Check my post again.

Thomson was given leniency (after being found guilty) by an IRB-sanctioned officer in lieu of the established punishment for his offense and the IRB intervened to uphold the minimum punishment for stamping.

Horwill was declared innocent by an IRB-sanctioned officer and now the IRB is overturning the ruling entirely.

You said:

There should be no process for overturning decisions made by IRB-sanctioned officials.Their judgement should be final as they are employed with the explicit intent of being unbiased officers upholding the established judiciary processes and punishments laid forth by the IRB itself.

The decision to give Thompson leniency was made by an IRB-sanctioned official and by your own words, there should be no process for overturning that decision. A decision he was quite entitled to make under the Laws of the game. Mealamu had his suspension for head-butting reduced to 2 weeks for example. However, the IRB appealed Thompson's decision and his suspension was extended.

The IRB have NOT overturned Horwill's ruling. They have appealed it as they are allowed to do as per the Laws.

While the Judiciary Officer is IRB-sanctioned, they are not IRB-appointed. The host nation appoints them and they are independent. I am only guessing but I think the IRB are appealing the decision for the same reason they appealed the Thompson decision. It looks bad. Thompson was given a one-week suspension (as the judicial officer was entitled to do) but the IRB believed that wasn't appropriate and gave the game a poor look. Horwill's case is the same. He has stamped on 3 people this year with nothing but an off-field yellow card and I thnk the IRB believe it is a bad look for the game if no action is taken here.

 

[Joe Blow]

Is that why they are appealing the decision? Because someone feels he us a repeat offender?
FAIL!
Whatever happened before has zero bearing on this incident. Now, if found guilty it would definitely have a bearing on the punishment,
Mind you be has a clean record having never been found guilty of this offence previously,

 

[Bullrush]

In under 16s, the 6 foot 6, 100kg monster from my team trampled my head. I got up and played on, cause i knew he didn't do it on purpose, and this kind of stuff happens all the time. Are you telling me next time i see him i should spit the dummy cause he must have done it on purpose?

In this case, Horwill didn't know where he was putting his foot down, so why should the past be bought back up? I'm sure there are plenty of players who this has happened too twice in a season, for some reason it doesn't seem to be bought up like it has been done for Horwill.

1. You should teach your 100kg monster how to play. In the years that I have been playing rugby, rugby league and gridiron I have had my head stepped on accidentally maybe 2-3 times max. Maybe spitting the dummy would be a good way to teach him to be less reckless. Being under 16, he has few years to get it right before the big boys touch him up a bit if he does it there.

2. Do you have any footage or can you provide references of these 'plenty of players who this has happened to'? I've seen plenty of players who have stamped and trampled other players like Horwill has this year. The difference is obviously most of them got yellow-carded, suspended or both. Can't really think of anyone who has done it 3 times or twice to the head without getting a rest on the side-line. Feel free to let me know of any other players though.

 

[Bullrush]

Is that why they are appealing the decision? Because someone feels he us a repeat offender?
FAIL!
Whatever happened before has zero bearing on this incident. Now, if found guilty it would definitely have a bearing on the punishment,
Mind you be has a clean record having never been found guilty of this offence previously,

I don't know why they are appealing. That's what the words, 'I am only guessing' would imply to most people.

Maybe they think the one boot to the head was enough without the other ones. It certainly looked bad enough and did enough damage by itself.

 

[the plastic paddy]

The whole citing procedure is a complete load of bollix. The IRB have made a balls up by appealing their own officers decision but most importantly they have allowed the matter to be hopelessly dragged out. The IRB needs to set up a committee of inquiry to cover every pro game worldwide consistently. It can be done via video conference, it is 2013 after all. Then, when a player is found not guilty they must not be tried again because it goes against any sense of natural justice. I am sure mistakes would happen as I personally think is the case in this instance but if you are cleared you are cleared and that should be the end of it as this nonsense is bringing the game into disrepute and will do more damage to the games image than a couple of stitches in a fellas head.

 

[the plastic paddy]

The righteous indignation on here is surprising for a group of blokes who claim to play the game.

We all know the rugby judiciary system lost all credibility a long time ago - it is a political farce that is a blight on a great game and needs to be fixed. Unfortunately forcing Horwill to face the judiciary twice does far more damage than it does good. It pales beside O'Connell's sickening kick to the head of David Kearney immediately before the Lions tour. I don't think O'Connell's kick was deliberate (or he should be in prison) but it was reckless on a scale that is barely comprehensible. When people are looking to cite precedents for accidental boots to the head, no one will remember Horwill 2013, but anyone who saw Kearney get kicked will never forget it.

When O'Connell does not get cited for a boot to the head like that before a lions tour (or for gouging Horgan in the corresponding game four years earlier after being named lions captain, where Quinlan did get cited for gouging Cullen), or Farrell for his boot where the recipient was stretchered off, but Horwill gets tried twice for this, the whole thing looks even more political and amateurish. This does not send a message about intolerance of recklessness on a rugby field because that ship sailed a long time ago - it does send a powerful message about who is running the IRB and how they are using their powers - and it is not one that this game needs.

For what it is worth, I have said before and I wil say again that Kev should sit out a few games, so should Farrell - and O'Connell should not be playing again this year. But this is not the right way of doing it. Set standards, educate citing officers and judiciary officials, develop standards. Judiciaries all over the world face issues with standards of guilt, burdens of proof and sentencing consistency and most get it wrong, but few get it wrong on the scale that the IRB does. For a sport that is supposedly the domain of private school educated lawyers the irony is not lost.

If Kev misses next week under these circumstances he just becomes a matyr for the wallabies. Eejits.

Sorry Alex but you really should remove the allegation that Paul O'Connell gouged someone. There was never the slightest indication from anybody that such a thing occurred. Fine to comment on Quinnie and Paulies incident with Dave Kearney but to accuse a player of gouging with absolutely zero evidence and when there was not the slightest suggestion of such a thing having occurred is not acceptable on a public forum.

 

[Josh123]

1. You should teach your 100kg monster how to play. In the years that I have been playing rugby, rugby league and gridiron I have had my head stepped on accidentally maybe 2-3 times max. Maybe spitting the dummy would be a good way to teach him to be less reckless. Being under 16, he has few years to get it right before the big boys touch him up a bit if he does it there.

2. Do you have any footage or can you provide references of these 'plenty of players who this has happened to'? I've seen plenty of players who have stamped and trampled other players like Horwill has this year. The difference is obviously most of them got yellow-carded, suspended or both. Can't really think of anyone who has done it 3 times or twice to the head without getting a rest on the side-line. Feel free to let me know of any other players though.

I dont need to teach him how to play rugby, stepping on another player is just something that does happen. He's not getting touched up by any big boys at the moment, but still the same old careless guy who will probably step on people even more. You say its happened to you 2-3 times, well for every person who's had it done to them, somebody's had to do it. and it just so happens, 2 of Horwill's have been recently.

As for your 2nd point, most of the examples in my mind have been club rugby, but the Farrell incident, which you seem to think he is so innocent in seems a perfect example from recent times. I'm sure if i had the time, i could go through game by game, and find 5 or 6 instances a game of where it happens, but i don't have the time or patience.

Obviously we don't see eye to eye on this, but i can guarantee you, people who step on you in a ruck or maul generally aren't doing it our of personal vengeance or malice, but simply because they are focusing on the ball or the man they have to clear out.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Again, it's far more clear cut than the alleged Farrell incident.

If you are not just trolling then you need to check yourself in.
Farrell is one very lucky bugger. His defence could only be that it never occurred to him there was a head on top of the blokes body.
And how come no one is incensed about the difference in treatment between Horwill and the Samoan 15?
He grabbed a bloke by the balls and was let off because the IRB appointed officer could not be satisfied that he intended to squeeze them. FFS?
You can sensuously cup a blokes gonads, accidentally squeeze them and yet go free.
Horwill should have said he was going for the balls!
The difference, of course, is that Samoa are not and were not playing the pride of the home nations.
This is Breaker Morant all over again.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Inside Shoulder]

He knew there were bodies down there. It's not like that's the first ruck he's ever been involved in.

True - Higgers could have run that defence but not Horwill!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Bullrush]

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 Horwill's 3rd one. My question to you was to find someone or footage of someone who had done it 3 times with no suspension. Can't think of anyone??