Wallabies: Latest Injuries and selection for Test 2

[the plastic paddy]

He will

He will almost certainly be gone for the third test. That is just bullshit.
We all know the judicial process is a mess but why do they choose now to appeal a decision when there have been so many bad/non decisions over the past couple of years.
The IRB, being Britain based, are determined for the Lions to finally win a series in this century.

If Aus win on saturday and Horwill is banned afterwards there will be the biggest shit storm ever seen. Doesn't worry me either way although this could play out very badly for the future of Lions tours which would not be a bad result.

 

[I like to watch]

Biggest shit storm by people who don't have a say.
There is way too much cash involved to kill this Golden goose.
Maybe there might be changes to the judiciary process,but time and money will cure most problems like this.

 

[Zander]

Horwill is going to be one fired up bloke on Saturday.

 

[oztimmay]

And in the unlikely event that he is suspended for the third test, is there an avenue of appeal? Or are we in kangaroo court land? Dunno if CAS or even the Australian legal system can help here.

One thing is for sure, there would be one hell of a shitstorm if he was suspended. Think a few bricks will be shat at ARU HQ, followed by some very angry telephone conversations.

Biggest shit storm by people who don't have a say.
There is way too much cash involved to kill this Golden goose.
Maybe there might be changes to the judiciary process,but time and money will cure most problems like this.

Also can't help but think that if something like this had an impact on ratings what Fox would think?

 

[BarneySF]

Biggest shit storm by people who don't have a say.
There is way too much cash involved to kill this Golden goose.
Maybe there might be changes to the judiciary process,but time and money will cure most problems like this.

 

[the plastic paddy]

Biggest shit storm by people who don't have a say.
There is way too much cash involved to kill this Golden goose.
Maybe there might be changes to the judiciary process,but time and money will cure most problems like this.

This episode cannot end well. As many of you have posted, Horwill is probably a certainty to be banned now. If Aus win on saturday and he is then banned the whining out of Lions fans (one of which I am not BTW) will be epic. If the Lions win on saturday then this business might well be seen by Aussie fans as a distraction that looks as though it has been orchestrated by Gatland etc. The IRB should never have taken this step because there is no good outcome possible.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

If the IRB have no confidence in the original decision then the bloke who made it should never be appointed again. In order to justify its intervention the IRB must think its a shocker.
It is not a good look to have the international controlling body expressing a view about a decision which (a) is supposed to be independent and (b) is made in its name.
What about the Samoan squirrel grip last week: why isn't that being reviewed? Because the IRB is based in Dublin and SA v Samoa does not involve their team?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[the plastic paddy]

If the IRB have no confidence in the original decision then the bloke who made it should never be appointed again. In order to justify its intervention the IRB must think its a shocker.
It is not a good look to have the international controlling body expressing a view about a decision which (a) is supposed to be independent and (b) is made in its name.
What about the Samoan squirrel grip last week: why isn't that being reviewed? Because the IRB is based in Dublin and SA v Samoa does not involve their team?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Who appointed Hampton ARU or IRB? Completely genuine question BTW, the answer to which might diffuse the row a bit. Can't help feeling that the non Murdoch media in the UK is priming it's audience for a pop at the Lions concept especially with the upcoming BT battle over the HEC.

 

[Wales Fan]

It's a pity all this Horwill bollocks couldn't be put to bed now, unfortunately the IRB in it's infinite wisdom can't help dragging the whole sorry saga out even further.
The whole episode just makes a mockery of the whole judicial system in Rugby these days.
It's gone from one extreme to the other, I remember many years ago (before rugby went professional) a Welsh lock called Kevin Moseley got sent off against France in the then 5 Nations - he placed his foot on a French forwards ass in a ruck and got sent off. 36 weeks he was banned - 36 bloody weeks !
Now you can step on someone's head and receive no punishment because they can't prove whether it was intentional or not.
And this isn't cause the guys an Aussie/Lion/southern hemisphere/northern hemisphere, couldn't care less where he's from or plays for. I've played for 20 odd years and I guarantee you if i'd done what Horwill did on any Saturday afternoon I'd have been sent off and banned for a long time.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

 

[vidiot]

If Horwill is suspended in the second hearing, can he/the ARU appeal (in the 72 hour window) and go best of three?

AFter two hearings, at 1-1, logically his innocence should be presumed and he should be abe to play until - the decider, after- the actual deciding game.

Oh. There is no logic to any of this?

 

[the plastic paddy]

If the IRB have no confidence in the original decision then the bloke who made it should never be appointed again. In order to justify its intervention the IRB must think its a shocker.
It is not a good look to have the international controlling body expressing a view about a decision which (a) is supposed to be independent and (b) is made in its name.
What about the Samoan squirrel grip last week: why isn't that being reviewed? Because the IRB is based in Dublin and SA v Samoa does not involve their team?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think we can be fairly confident your man is unlikely to be overseeing a citing commission any time soon!?!?

 

[the plastic paddy]

If Horwill is suspended in the second hearing, can he/the ARU appeal (in the 72 hour window) and go best of three?

AFter two hearings, at 1-1, logically his innocence should be presumed and he should be abe to play until - the decider, after- the actual deciding game.

Oh. There is no logic to any of this?

It is a complete mess!!!!

 

[vidiot]

It is a complete mess!!!!

Retrying a player found not guilty is pretty dodgy.

Have they given a specific reason for repeating the judicial process? No.

Is there new evidence? No.

Is there a higher court or authority? No. So what makes the next decision more correct than this one?

The explanation of the original hearing findings is here. This opens a can of worms for the IRB.

 

[Joe Blow]

The findings seem reasonable enough. Most are watching the incident frame by frame played very slowly which does make it look a lot worse.
At normal speed it is tough to notice that anything happened at all.
They are going after Horwill and I cannot imagine that they will find him not guilty again after going to all this trouble.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I think we can be fairly confident your man is unlikely to be overseeing a citing commission any time soon!?!?

He's appointed by the IRB and he's a Kiwi.
He's not my or our man on any view.
I think Horwill was incredibly lucky but that's not the point. If the IRB are reviewing this one then they need to review this one:

This gentleman got off, for want of a better term, on the basis that he didn't intend to squeeze the testicles: evidently cupping them lovingly is OK.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Immature, selfish little pricks? That's pretty abusive stuff. You need to show some respect.

Respect is a two way street. These two have a history of not respecting the Wallabies jersey, their team or their team-mates. When they show they have grown up, they will earn all of our respect. Seems their team-mates at the moment are none too happy about their behaviour. I would hazard a guess that they will be called a lot worse than immature, selfish little pricks.

 

[gold heart]

Interesting Horwill was saying that he is confident of being cleared with the IRB - he mentioned that there were 9 different camera angles that show that he is clearly innocent. I do not know if anyone on this forum have seen the other angles?

 

[RedsHappy]

I'm not sure what you're delighted about, RedsHappy . He didn't abuse them or call for them to be dropped. He said it wasn't best practice but wouldn't affect their performance. I think we can all agree with that.

Unfortunately you have selectively quoted from the full text of that article I linked to in order to support your own perspective wrt this issue (as you stated it above), which is totally different to mine.

My 'delight' re Deans' publicised intervention in this matter is twofold (and it's obvious he was robustly critical of JOC (James O'Connor)'s and KB (Kurtley Beale)'s judgement and conduct if you read the whole article):

(a) he's shown leadership in not hiding from the issue (or issuing the usual PR type banalities to make it go away) and wants it clear that these players exercised poor judgement and he as head coach wants that publicly known and

(b) he's thus set proper defining standards for the conduct he does expect from the Wallabies in a period such as this pre a major Test of great importance.

I'm no fan of Deans but in my view in this case he's shown good judgement and appropriate leadership. (And I speculate but he's probably also had a gutful of these two particular players' embarrassing 'incidents' over past periods.)

 

[the plastic paddy]

He's appointed by the IRB and he's a Kiwi.
He's not my or our man on any view.
I think Horwill was incredibly lucky but that's not the point. If the IRB are reviewing this one then they need to review this one:

This gentleman got off, for want of a better term, on the basis that he didn't intend to squeeze the testicles: evidently cupping them lovingly is OK.

Appointed by or approved by the IRB? If the latter and appointed by the ARU then an Appeal can be justified but if it can't be heard before the test then it will just make the whole thing ten times worse and risk compromising the seemingly positive atmosphere at the games which will be bad for the game.

 

[Ash]

The thing that is so frustrating is that Ben Lucas got his ear taken off by a stamp in another game which they were happy to let slide.

Surely if this was just about clamping down on stamping, they would have appealed to get Farrell cited.

There's a definite double standard about the IRB's behaviour in this.

BTW, I am another who was amazed Horwill was let off, just as I thought that Farrell was freaking lucky he wasn't cited. Stepping into a ruck onto someone's head is clearly dumb and dangerous play. Just as moving your boot onto someone's head is clearly dumb and dangerous play, and claiming being unsighted can open up a whole can of worms. The whole citing and suspension method from the IRB is a complete and utter farce, and the whole fact that they are appealing their own process makes it a bigger farce.