Dan Cole - How did he get away with that?

"The RFU’s citing commissioner has viewed the incident many times and using all the available camera angles and believes the incident is accidental due to the dynamics of the contact as Dan Cole goes to ground,” an RFU spokesman said. “No further action is to be taken.”
 
I'm confused so are you allowed to bite a player or not?
 
 
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/08/article-2415458-1BB33E27000005DC-844_634x412.jpg

That picture makes it look like a high tackle to me

If thats a high tackle then the game is heading in the wrong direction, might as well play touch rugby.

Come on people don't be scared of the Leicester Mafia.

I still haven't seen the incident, but I did smile when someone defended Dan Cole by saying Mieres cut his hand on Cole's teeth. Just how sharp are they?

The "cutting action" happened as they hit the ground. Which can be quite easily due to the impact.

When I used to skydive, far too often I landed with my mouth open and bit my tongue quite badly.

If Cole actively bit Mieres he should have been cited and banned.

If however, like Cian Healy in the summer, there was contact with teeth and flesh but not deliberate then he deserves to be a free man.

Those with an axe to grind and those who do not get enough attention at home will jump up and down like little children.

the majority of sensible posters will take a balanced view. It may be different to mine - but if they weigh up all the options then that is fine.

Aren't front row players fed enough?
 
Seems to be a trait that the modern front rower has a little nibble here and there.
 
I played a lot of rugby over the years and I have never bitten or been bitten by anyone. The RFU had yet another chance to make a stand against this vile disgusting element of our game and they bottled it.
 
People who defend such actions are no better IMO.

I have not seen it but its been checked out by people whose job it is to do so. It was out in the open - it wasnt hidden in a scrum, maul or ruck so its not like there is a need to presume what happened. The 'victim' has also, as far as we know, not made any formal complaints. It is a contact sport and given the balance of probabilities all sorts of weird accidents can and sadly do happen.

Surely there must have been more doubtful incidents to go after this last weekend? Or does the natural bias of the OP, given who the Tiger's next opponents are, have an influence?

Scrumpy wrote:Aren't front row players fed enough?
 
Seems to be a trait that the modern front rower has a little nibble here and there.
 
I played a lot of rugby over the years and I have never bitten or been bitten by anyone. The RFU had yet another chance to make a stand against this vile disgusting element of our game and they bottled it.
 
People who defend such actions are no better IMO.

I refuse to defend biting.

I also refuse to castigate someone who has been deemed not to bite.

You wish to be judge, jury and executioner - fine. But do not try to take any moral high ground as you have already shown yourself to be a grubby, sordid little muck raker. Just liek the rest of us.

"do not try to take any moral high ground as you have already shown yourself to be a grubby, sordid little muck raker."

 

Hit a nerve me thinks!

Doesn't change the fact that imo there is no room for this vile disgusting element in our game, maybe Mr Cole should be made to wear a gum shield to stop him drawing blood in the future.

Scrumpy wrote:If thats a high tackle then the game is heading in the wrong direction, might as well play touch rugby.

Seriously? Mieres' right arm is wrapped around Cole's head and neck and his hand is over the lower part of the face. Much higher and it wouldn't be a tackle at all. It wasn't malicious, but it was high and bordering on dangerous.

I don't think you could prove intention to bite under the circumstances, and you could argue a good case that Cole didn't really have much option. Accidental contact with the face by Mieres, accidental bite by Cole. Makes a bit of a mockery of the Ferris/Hartley case, though, where both contact and bite were fairly clearly deliberate but only the second offence was punished.

How can that be a high tackle?

From that picture I really dont think he should be banned. Also I know most will disagree but if you wrap your arm around someones head and put your hand on or in their mouth I think a bite is fair game.

It annoys me that you drop your arm on someones face but if that person bites you back they get the ban. As per the Ezebeth Senatore case.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/rugby-gold/argentina-forward-leonardo-senatore-cops-nine-week-ban-for-biting-springboks-lock-eben-etzebeth/story-fndpt9s1-1226707443242

LondonTiger even you have to admit he did bite Mieres. As to whether it was intentional or accidental - tough to say. In all likelihood it was accidental but does that make the biting okay? I am not convinced personally. I can understand why he was let off though.

'As to whether it was intentional or accidental - tough to say'

Only Cole knows and all this has done is muddy the water on future incidents, it would have been better for the game to ban him for a match or two.

Scrumpy wrote:'As to whether it was intentional or accidental - tough to say'

Only Cole knows and all this has done is muddy the water on future incidents, it would have been better for the game to ban him for a match or two.

Why?

Surely if someone puts there hand in someones mouth and then they both hit the ground it's common sense his mouth will close. I mean who hit's the ground with a relaxed jaw?

It's not like the head lock is the preferred way to tackle in rugby.

beshocked wrote:LondonTiger even you have to admit he did bite Mieres. As to whether it was intentional or accidental - tough to say. In all likelihood it was accidental but does that make the biting okay? I am not convinced personally. I can understand why he was let off though.

I have not seen any evidence of a wound.

I am prepared to accept that if there was such a wound then there was contact between the teeth and the arm. I guess we can call this a bite - but probably an involuntary one - ie caused as they hit the ground. I tried to explain how trhis can happen - after all I did not intend to bite my own tongue when parachuting.


Now you seem to be saying that even if someone shoves their arm in your mouth and the impact of hitting the ground causes a wound that this is bad play? what is the player supposed to do rip their own jaw off?

I will be accused of hypocrisy and only defending a Leicester player so will leave this thread now as nothing I can ever say will convince people that is not the case. anyone who want to debate it with me send a PM.

Mieres put his hand into Cole's mouth whilst trying complete a tackle. There was no movement of Cole's head and the hand was not retracted until after the players had hit the floor. The view was not impeded and Cole does not wear a mouth guard.

Open and shut case for the RFU. There's nothing that suggests Cole's actions were at any point that of the aggressor or that he was trying to bring injury to Mieres.

Personally I have little sympathy, if you put your hand in someone's mouth and don't immediately remove it then It's your fault of you get bitten.

Agree on the Senatore ban. It is apparently fine to throttle your opponents but to fight back by biting the arm that threatens your ability to continue breathing... 9 game ban.

Londontiger I am only going by the image shown. It looks like Cole is biting him. As I said in all likelihood it is accidental.

Don't worry it's expected that you will defend your club man to the last. Same with nathan and formerly known as sam.

formerly known as sam it sounds as if you condone biting. Worrying if true.

It seems like Mieres didn't complain so it looks like case closed anyway.

I don't condone biting but neither do I condone inserting your fingers into another players mouth or strangling etc etc. There's no reason for Mieres to have his hands on Cole's face just as there was no reason for Etzebeth to strangle Senatore.

ESPN showed the slow motion replay of the incident in the game footage on Sunday. You can clearly see that Cole makes no move towards Mieres' hand.

beshocked wrote:Londontiger I am only going by the image shown. It looks like Cole is biting him. As I said in all likelihood it is accidental.

Don't worry it's expected that you will defend your club man to the last. Same with nathan and formerly known as sam.

formerly known as sam it sounds as if you condone biting. Worrying if true.

It seems like Mieres didn't complain so it looks like case closed anyway.

I (and i'm guessing the other two) would call him out if i thought he was in the wrong, but it just doesnt stack up.

Ignacio Mieres ‏@cangumieres 46s
about what happened on the weekend. No intention. i never complaint to the referee. spoke with Cole after the game, and everything is ok


Mieres on Twitter