Biting in Eng v Ire

First topic message reminder :

Just a quick post to clarify that there was no gouging in the Eng-Ire match. It's come out that the Irish players were complaining of biting, specifically on Ferris's finger.

Full story here:

http://www.espnscrum.com/ireland/rugby/story/161365.html

The white card in super XV is not pertaining to an individual per se, it has to do with a suspected incident at a specific ruck or time of the match, if there is a suspicion that a certain player is involved then the individual will be looked at, at the citing investigation of the incident.

Could we have them on here?

MrsP wrote:Could we have them on here?

I think Portnoy will tell you he's already been a recipient of a few.

you suggest we call it the wummometer?

biltongbek wrote:you suggest we call it the wummometer?

It would explode from being overloaded in it's first hour of use if certain folks happened to be around at the time!

At this point I am waving my arms around in an Irish scrummie sort of way!!!!

Was that humerous or controversial? Let the jury decide!

Taffineastbourne wrote:At this point I am waving my arms around in an Irish scrummie sort of way!!!!

I've seen Fourie du Preez do that a lot last year.

Not sure what Irish scrumhalves or Fourie du Preez have to do with Dylan Hartley (allegedly) biting Ferris there lads?

Taffineastbourne wrote:Was that humerous or controversial? Let the jury decide!

Neither.

Just irrelevant, but, why change the habit of a lifetime, eh?*

* Humerous

For balance,it is not only Irish 9's who wave their arms around alot!

see this is exactly why I always argued for a "wastebin" sub forum

This thread is indeed probably in the wrong forum, but there isn't an angling section is there?

It's got trollers, fish hooks and bites. Then there's those posters who try angulation and display certain goldfish characteristics by going round the bowl and are surprised they keep seeing the same thing every time.*
The clincher is that apparently the name Hartley also means trout in a long forgotten Maori dialect - only coddin.

*ASBO - great line back there

The Great Aukster wrote:This thread is indeed probably in the wrong forum, but there isn't an angling section is there?

It's got trollers, fish hooks and bites. Then there's those posters who try angulation and display certain goldfish characteristics by going round the bowl and are surprised they keep seeing the same thing every time.*
The clincher is that apparently the name Hartley also means trout in a long forgotten Maori dialect - only coddin.

*ASBO - great line back there

Well summarised Aukster, you could have solved this riddle a little earlier, eh?

The Great Aukster wrote:This thread is indeed probably in the wrong forum, but there isn't an angling section is there?

It's got trollers, fish hooks and bites. Then there's those posters who try angulation and display certain goldfish characteristics by going round the bowl and are surprised they keep seeing the same thing every time.*
The clincher is that apparently the name Hartley also means trout in a long forgotten Maori dialect - only coddin.

*ASBO - great line back there

very funny

There has been some quality posts on here. Reading this morning has given me a little laugh

When does this hearing happen

Quick question: do hearings have deadlines? or can they delay it for as long as they want?

As far as I know the citing has to take place within a specific period of time, not heard of a specific time for the hearing though

I thought that it started today or tomorrow?

Taffineastbourne wrote:For balance,it is not only Irish 9's who wave their arms around alot!

I know if Phillips wasn't so big he would take off

I believe the player is technically suspended until the hearing so one would hope that it was held in a timely manner?

geoff998rugby wrote:

Taffineastbourne wrote:For balance,it is not only Irish 9's who wave their arms around alot!

I know if Phillips wasn't so big he would take off

Kinda like an ostrich.

Carpe Diem wrote:I believe the player is technically suspended until the hearing so one would hope that it was held in a timely manner?

Really? I would have thought otherwise myself. Innocent until proven guilty?

17.9 Initial Procedures – Citing Complaint by a Citing Commissioner
17.9.1 Subject to Regulation 17.9.14, a citing complaint by a Citing Commissioner must be sent in writing to the Secretary of the Host Union, or his nominee, in which the incident that is the subject of the citing complaint occurred within 48 hours of the completion of the Match subject to Regulation 17.9.2 below.

For the purposes of this Regulation, a complaint is deemed to be sent when:
(a) it is transmitted by facsimile or e-mail provided that timed and confirmed notice of transmission can be provided; or
(b) it is received by the Secretary of the Host Union or his nominee.

17.9.3 The citing complaint shall contain the following information:
(a) the date and place of the alleged Illegal and/or Foul Play;
(b) the name of the Player in respect of whom the complaint is made and the team he was playing for at the time of the alleged Illegal and/or Foul Play;
(c) the name of the opposing team; and
(d) full details of the alleged Illegal and/or Foul Play including brief details of the evidence relied upon

17.9.8 The Player cited shall be supplied with a copy of the relevant reports and information, and video coverage of the incident, if available, by the
nominated official of the Host Union as soon as reasonably practicable and advised:
(a) of the date, place and time of the Disciplinary Committee or Judicial Officer hearing at which the disciplinary proceedings will be heard;
(b) the identity of the Disciplinary Committee members of Judicial Officer (as the case may be);
(c) that he will be required to attend in person at the hearing;
(d) that if he is unable to appear at the Disciplinary Committee or Judicial Officer hearing as notified, he should advise the nominated officer of the Union forthwith;
(e) that he is entitled to adduce evidence and make submissions and be represented by his Union and/or a legal advisor; and
(f) he is not eligible to play pending resolution of the case.

17.9.11 In the interests of time and minimising inconvenience, a Player who has been cited, and whose disciplinary hearing is pending, can be required by the Disciplinary Committee or Judicial Officer, prior to the hearing, to supply it with full particulars of the case that will be presented on his behalf at the hearing
17.9.12 Where a Player is the subject of a citing complaint, his case should, wherever practicable, be adjudicated on within 5 days of the end of the
Match in which the alleged foul play that is the subject of the complaint occurred.

17.9.14 In circumstances where a Player(a) has not been cited within the time period specified in Regulation 17.9.1 and/or 17.9.2 and/or 17.10.2 as a
result of either:
(a) mistaken identity; or
(b) the nature of the incident(s) concerned is such that further investigation is needed to identify the Player(s) alleged to have committed an act(s) of Illegal and/or Foul Play; then a citing complaint may be validly made by the Citing Commissioner (or where Regulation 17.10 applies the Union concerned) notwithstanding the submission of the citing complaint after the expiry of the applicable time period specified in Regulation 17.9.1, 17.9.2 or 17.10.2 (as the case may be). However, any citing complaint submitted pursuant to this Clause shall be lodged as soon as reasonably practicable and in any event within a period of fourteen days from the conclusion of the applicable citing period.

Thanks biltong

eirebilly wrote:

Carpe Diem wrote:I believe the player is technically suspended until the hearing so one would hope that it was held in a timely manner?

Really? I would have thought otherwise myself. Innocent until proven guilty?

The only reason i say this is because of a single line in the BBC article: "Northampton forward Hartley cannot play, pending his disciplinary hearing. "

Can anyone confirm if this is true or is it just the BBC being 'ace' again?

Carpe Diem wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

Carpe Diem wrote:I believe the player is technically suspended until the hearing so one would hope that it was held in a timely manner?

Really? I would have thought otherwise myself. Innocent until proven guilty?

The only reason i say this is because of a single line in the BBC article: "Northampton forward Hartley cannot play, pending his disciplinary hearing. "

Can anyone confirm if this is true or is it just the BBC being 'ace' again?

That's an interesting one. In the past I've heard of teams voluntarily withdrawing players pending a hearing, so I suspect the Beeb are wrong.

I always thought it was that a player couldn't play if he was cited. Maybe that's what the Beeb's always said which is why I think it. Don't know if it's right or not.

rugbydreamer wrote:I always thought it was that a player couldn't play if he was cited. Maybe that's what the Beeb's always said which is why I think it. Don't know if it's right or not.

Thats when the citing has been dealt with on the field (yellow or red card). When its a complaint that the ref hasnt seen then thats a whole new barrel of fish i think.

Thanks Bilt, seems fairly clear!!

I've jsut watched the youtbue footage.

At 10 secs in you see ferris and hartley in a ruck. Ferris' s hand is on hartley's face. Ferris withdraws his right hand quite quickly.

Then at the next stoppage he takes his complaint to the ref.

I'd say that Hartley did bit him.

I'd also say that Hartley didnt move his head in order to bite him.


Ferris' hand is right in hartley's face.

Hartley is going to be in trouble unless he was being fishooked face massaged eye gouged etc by ferris. Then he might be able to claim some kind of self defence argument or at least heavily mitigate the penalty.

It is pretty obvious though that hartley did bite him.

Triangulation wrote:I've jsut watched the youtbue footage.

At 10 secs in you see ferris and hartley in a ruck. Ferris' s hand is on hartley's face. Ferris withdraws his right hand quite quickly.

Then at the next stoppage he takes his complaint to the ref.

I'd say that Hartley did bit him.

I'd also say that Hartley didnt move his head in order to bite him.


Ferris' hand is right in hartley's face.

Hartley is going to be in trouble unless he was being fishooked face massaged eye gouged etc by ferris. Then he might be able to claim some kind of self defence argument or at least heavily mitigate the penalty.

It is pretty obvious though that hartley did bite him.

Brilliant! I get the last word on this AND when i am proved correct i will return to claim what is mine: my prima nocte bragging/nostradamus/most prescient poster rights.

Cheers

No,I get the last word on this and that word is ................procrastination

I'll just add that the next poster after I finish this, can have the last word.

Holly Wilaboobie

...all well and good my little (said in a really condescending voice) fellow posters...but not one of you can with any credibility contradicted my take on cry-baby-gate so i get the last word on the subject.

I will be proved right in time.

You're right,you've quite clearly said that "It is pretty obvious though that hartley did bite him."

I can't contradict that.

Triangulation wrote:...all well and good my little (said in a really condescending voice) fellow posters...but not one of you can with any credibility contradicted my take on cry-baby-gate so i get the last word on the subject.

I will be proved right in time.

What are you going on about now?

The citing committee are obviously not making a snap decision.

Waiting for some solid evidence they can get their teeth into.

yes they're clearly just chewing over everything....




I am quite ashamed I just wrote that.

Saw the clip and I can't make out a damn thing.
Must be old age...

Don't feel bad nobbled, I can't see a thing either.

I don't know about 'bite' but I do know there's a lot of lip going on in these threads post 6N.

I guess some are happy and want to share the 'love'.

Fly, as long as there is no liplocking involved with occasional tongue I am fine with it.

Reminds me of an old wrestling joke. Wrestler in a death lock, he thought he saw the opponents private part, in desperation gave it a jolly good bite, and presto he was free. Turns out but it was his own.

When is the hearing? Clark s is on monday I know but didn't hear about this one

toothless....

Nice to see Triangulation repeat what I wrote back on page 1 or so...