• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Video: Judiciary looks into Rhodes collar and Deysel throttle

Status
Not open for further replies.
The_Brown_Hornet

The_Brown_Hornet

John Eales (66)
I know these guys are pros, but I wouldn't be surprised that there will be some kind of square up next time the Sharks and Tahs meet. Players have long memories.

More seriously, it's this kind of ridiculous decision that leads to vigilante justice on the paddock.
 
qwerty51

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Don't forget Sharks vs Force either. I'm sure a few other Force players might want a square up too on Jannie.
 
Richo

Richo

John Thornett (49)
Unbelievable.

The most serious problem with this decision is not the inequity (which is bad), but the message it sends: safety is not of particular interest to the SANZAR judiciary. They had a chance to come down very hard on a particular type of dirty play and completely botched it.
 
Blue

Blue

Andrew Slack (58)
qwerty51 said:
Don't forget Sharks vs Force either. I'm sure a few other Force players might want a square up too on Jannie.
Click to expand...

So the Sharks can take revenge on the Force for Ndungane being dropped on his head ("he could have died you know")

Come on. Don't get silly now. Maybe Carter will try to tackle a bit harded the next time they play but vigilantism? Don't be silly.
 
Blue

Blue

Andrew Slack (58)
Blue

Blue

Andrew Slack (58)
Bowside said:
I hope the sharks meet the tahs in the finals and deysel gets what's coming to him.
Click to expand...

So in a final, the Tahs will throw caution to the wind and make fucking up Deysel a priority? Everyone's gone dotty in this thread.
 
Ash

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
This is from my observations, but I think that the SA citings and penalties (that is, for stuff that occurs in SA) are generally more lenient than the Aus / NZ ones (of course, there are exceptions). I don't think there's a bias towards anyone from any country, eg I've seen Aus teams do things in SA that I am sure would be cited in Aus or NZ, and nothing happens. I consider it more of a "cultural" thing, but it's a shame there's not more consistency across the citings and rulings.
 
Hawko

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
Blue said:
So in a final, the Tahs will throw caution to the wind and make fucking up Deysel a priority? Everyone's gone dotty in this thread.
Click to expand...

You're not wrong Blue. If a hothead like Carter can control himself under those circumstances then a team with the sort of discipline the Tahs have will square it up on the scoreboard, not the next time they play. People can say what they like about the Tahs but they always are tightly self-disciplined. Its a long time since Duncan McCrae played for the Tahs.

That said, a certain feeling of melancholy washes over me when I recall his name and his theme song immediately intrudes into my brainspace.
 
Ruggo

Ruggo

Mark Ella (57)
Bruce Ross said:
I totally disagree, Moses. A gutless act like that deserves a couple of whacks.
Click to expand...

Yes he deserved a couple of whacks for that. Punching a bloke on the ground who is not facing you is also a gutless act. I agree with sentimant but not the method. Look a bloke right in the eye then knock his block off.
 
Blue

Blue

Andrew Slack (58)
Ash said:
This is from my observations, but I think that the SA citings and penalties (that is, for stuff that occurs in SA) are generally more lenient than the Aus / NZ ones (of course, there are exceptions). I don't think there's a bias towards anyone from any country, eg I've seen Aus teams do things in SA that I am sure would be cited in Aus or NZ, and nothing happens. I consider it more of a "cultural" thing, but it's a shame there's not more consistency across the citings and rulings.
Click to expand...

Speak to any Saffer fan and they will tell you that Aussies always get off too light. I don't lean either way. It's pretty natural having that perception either way but I think they fuck it up about equally.

Funny thing is that up to this point is it just me or Saffa teams have had an unusually clean year. Lot less cards and citings this year or am I mistaken. I know for instances the Bulls and Stormers have installed very heavy internal penalties in the team for carded offenses.

The judiciary in SA has been pretty heavy handed from what I have seen. Not in this case of course.
 
Ash

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
Blue - I guess I was trying to say that the SA citing / judiciary is not biased, but "more permissive" with every team in player, in general, in my opinion. Having said that, I reckon the judiciary in SA is pretty heavy handed for repeat or known offenders. I would love a league or AFL style citing process/commission in rugby to get consistency across the board. The points system utilised by both NRL and AFL comps is also a much better system than the typical "ban for X weeks".

But yeah, I think there's been less cards and citings this year in general.
 
Elfster

Elfster

Alex Ross (28)
Would have still liked for Piutau to have got something for his punches. It was retaliation and foul play. Regardless of any mitigating circumstances for the retaliation (and from my reffing experience I can't remember that section of the Law that covers players' making up the laws to suit their circumstances due to "mitigating circumstances") it was still foul play. And that behaviour should be looked at independently and without reference to any other action. In all a bad precedent from my perspective and will only lead to further apparent inconsistent rulings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HG
HG

HG

Jimmy Flynn (14)
100% agree Elfster, Piutau should have been given a week of. No where in the law book does the words mitigating circumstances appear. All it does is open up a can of worms that will come back to bite judiciary on the arse. So next week a player gets hit a bit late and high, get up and swings one. Does he get off under the same "mitigating circumstances" deal?
 
The_Brown_Hornet

The_Brown_Hornet

John Eales (66)
Blue said:
Speak to any Saffer fan and they will tell you that Aussies always get off too light. I don't lean either way. It's pretty natural having that perception either way but I think they fuck it up about equally.

Funny thing is that up to this point is it just me or Saffa teams have had an unusually clean year. Lot less cards and citings this year or am I mistaken. I know for instances the Bulls and Stormers have installed very heavy internal penalties in the team for carded offenses.

The judiciary in SA has been pretty heavy handed from what I have seen. Not in this case of course.
Click to expand...

I'd be interested to see how we get off lightly. How many of our players are involved in these kinds of incidents? We can't be accused of being soft and dirty at the same time. ;)

But seriously, the problem I have is the inconsistency with respect to the judiciary. It seems completely arbitrary. I think the points system used in the other football codes here would be a good start in making it better.
 
Jnor

Jnor

Peter Fenwicke (45)
Elfster said:
Would have still liked for Piutau to have got something for his punches. It was retaliation and foul play. Regardless of any mitigating circumstances for the retaliation (and from my reffing experience I can't remember that section of the Law that covers players' making up the laws to suit their circumstances due to "mitigating circumstances") it was still foul play. And that behaviour should be looked at independently and without reference to any other action. In all a bad precedent from my perspective and will only lead to further apparent inconsistent rulings.
Click to expand...

I really don't think that looking at Piutau's behaviour in isolation is in any way going to improve the process. All the contributing factors should be taken into account, not wilfully ignored. I definitely don't think he should receive the same punishment as someone who throws a couple of unprovoked punches cos they're a knob. I don't know if he should have gotten off completely scot free but I'm much more willing to accept that ruling than Deysel getting 2 weeks. It might not be appropriate but if I was Carter I would be ruing not having belted him.
 
Bowside

Bowside

Peter Johnson (47)
Blue said:
Funny thing is that up to this point is it just me or Saffa teams have had an unusually clean year. Lot less cards and citings this year or am I mistaken. I know for instances the Bulls and Stormers have installed very heavy internal penalties in the team for carded offenses.
Click to expand...

Certainly seems to be more of a problem at the sharks than at the other franchises. Isn't rhodes a former sharks player?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top