Clark/Hawkins incident from todays LV cup final

First topic message reminder :

Have a look at the youtube video;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=d_5Vlsyekio

After the whistle has gone, When Clark gets up he bends Hawkins right arm the wrong way. It's being reported that it dislocated his arm. What are your thoughts on it, should Clark be cited and banned?

In my mind it looks deliberate and therefore should see a fairly long ban. What do you guys think?

Didnt Rougerie sue Phil Greening for loss of earnings following a high tackle in a club game.
Rougerie also claimed that he missed out on International selection as a result and claimed loss of earnings from potential international matches.

I read that the case was recetly concluded with a settlement after many years in the courts.

I dont know very much about him to be honest but from what i have read, he was very much in line to recieve a new contract and at 28 it would not be a bad investment in case of injuries. It would be a harsh blow for the man if he was doing his best to get a contract only to lose out to thuggery.

I've been left open mouthed by that, truly shocking.

according to a post on the planetrugby forums, his arm is broken in four places. If saints come out and condemn it they will have accepted liability and would be open to criminal actions.

Christ thats far worse than had been suggested previously.

bloody hell. I thought he'd just broken his elbow? ell you know not only just, that's bad enough that he's broken that, but in four places? so nasty.

If it is broken in 4 places then Clark has had more than just a tug, he has twisted as well. If that the case we may actually see the longest ban that can be given.

It still looks so intentional as well, terrible.

It sounds like a really nasty injury.
Looks bad on the replays too - if proved to be intentional then Clark will have the book thrown at him.
Shame - as Stuart Lancaster was raving about the potential of Callum Clark at the start of the 6N.

I just cant figure out for the life of me why someone would want to do that...

In the tri nations Rugby League last year there was an NZ player who tried to break the leg of an English player (his cousin), even admitting it and i thought to myself at the time that there was seriously something wrong with that guy and it would be better if he doesnt play again if the possibility of those types of brain farts are present.

Same for Clark if he is found guilty.

Has he been cited yet?

I am so disappointed by this and horrified that anyone would behave this way. He will get a very long ban and he can kiss goodbye to any chance he had of international honours in the foreseeable future. Clarke had the makings of a very useful player but this is so unforgiveable it could be the end of his career in the top flight. I can only hope that Hawkins makes a full recovery but it's going to take a while.

eirebilly wrote:I just cant figure out for the life of me why someone would want to do that...

In the tri nations Rugby League last year there was an NZ player who tried to break the leg of an English player (his cousin), even admitting it and i thought to myself at the time that there was seriously something wrong with that guy and it would be better if he doesnt play again if the possibility of those types of brain farts are present.

Same for Clark if he is found guilty.

Has he been cited yet?

Not heard anything yet, but he's got to be.

Im normally very much against the hang em and flog em brigade but this is very differnet to most incidents we see.
This was not in play, this was not an instictive or reactionary moment. He was under no duress when he did it.

The level of injury caused is pretty extreme, and whilst he may have inteneded to simply hurt the player ratehr than break the arm the atcual action is clealry deliberate and we cant argue very dangerous.

If we are going to have heavy sanctions in rugby it should be for incidents like this. A bit of thumb sucking is nothing next to this.

The citing dealine is tomorrow,. The RFU have confirmed they are looking into incidents in the game ( standard repsonse) . It may be that they are awaiting a decision to involve the police in the matter before announcing a citing. This is a very extreme case and the are right to handle it delicatly. If no action is forthcoming it would be an embaresment to the sport, pretty unthinkable that there wont be.

If no action it taken I will be writing a letter of complaint.

Might not make much of a difference, but I can't stand the thought of having players in the game like Clark that can actually behave like that on the rugby pitch and escape punishment. It's disgusting.

Dreamer, thats not a bad idea. In fact I would encourage everyone who feels that way to do it.

I can't see how there could be no action taken. Its way too serious to be ignored. I would also pen a letter if there was no action.

It could be worse if the RFU do nothing about it. Tigers go to play Saints and Franklins Gardens in the next few weeks and as I said before it could turn ugly if Clark runs out for Saints. Tigers have some hot headed players (captain Geordan Murphy included) and the East Midlands derby games are passionate enough without the under tone of perceived injustice.

If Clark plays in that game I'd put money on multiple cards being used and more than the normal 1 per side that seems the standard for AP clashes between these two at the minute.

There can be no possibility of inaction. It will be at least RFU disciplinary and may become GBH with police involvement.

formerly known as Sam wrote:It could be worse if the RFU do nothing about it. Tigers go to play Saints and Franklins Gardens in the next few weeks and as I said before it could turn ugly if Clark runs out for Saints. Tigers have some hot headed players (captain Geordan Murphy included) and the East Midlands derby games are passionate enough without the under tone of perceived injustice.

If Clark plays in that game I'd put money on multiple cards being used and more than the normal 1 per side that seems the standard for AP clashes between these two at the minute.

That's what is worrying me. i don't want to see the game turn into a cheap shot match. It's not what rugby is about.

EDIT: Noticed that the media outlets are picking up on it since Cockerill commented on it.

it's made the Beeb anyway :http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/17460982

Love it
Media tagline: "Leicester director of rugby Richard Cockerill has castigated Northampton's Calum Clark "

Actual statement: "Something's gone on there but we'll let them look at it and sort it out"

ah sure but the Beeb's headline is so much catchier...

As far as I'm concerned it's really obvious what happened and Saints should be doing something about it.

Clark HAS been cited:

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/breaking-news-second-northampton-saints-captain-cited-1-3650425

finally....

Saints Calum Clark has been cited by the RFU for an act "contrary to good sportsmanship". @LeicesterTigers

http://twitter.com/#!/martin_crowson/status/182515326641127425

Clark's hearing will take place next Monday at 3.30pm with Judge Jeff Blackett. @LeicesterTigers

http://twitter.com/#!/martin_crowson/status/182515515040862208

Phew, i am glad that this will face the light of day and get an investigatin.

I'll be interested to see if Mallinder selects him for this weekends fixture.

likes this

Ozzy3213 wrote:I'll be interested to see if Mallinder selects him for this weekends fixture.

following an earlier conversation re: Hartley doesnt citing mean youre banned till after the hearing anyway?

No. I am pretty sure that players have played whislt awaiting hearings in the past.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:I'll be interested to see if Mallinder selects him for this weekends fixture.

following an earlier conversation re: Hartley doesnt citing mean youre banned till after the hearing anyway?

i think that was only the case with the 6 nations.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:I'll be interested to see if Mallinder selects him for this weekends fixture.

following an earlier conversation re: Hartley doesnt citing mean youre banned till after the hearing anyway?

For this case i am sure that Clark will be suspended until the hearing. I would be suprised if he was even selected to play.

I have just had a thorough read of RFU REGULATION 19 – DISCIPLINE, APPENDIX 4 CITING PROCEDURES and can see nothing in there to suggest that once cited a player cannot play.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/17460982

on the Beeb.

All saints have said is that leicester and Cockerill are "entitled to their own opinions". That's a bit of a weird thing to say.

Thank goodness he's finally been cited though. I sincerely hope Saints see sense and don't pick him to play this weekend.

That's a throw away line pasted into that story. I would take it with a pinch of salt as it probably formed part of a longer conversation with the journalist but they have taken all context away from the statement within the article.

aye most probably so Ozzy

That Northampton statement is clearly in response to a loaded question eg :

Richard Cockerill said "Calum Clark *cough* done it on purpose it's pretty horrendous" what do you have to say about that spokesperson?"

Ill forgive the non answer



I did wonder about the banning thing, its a 6 nations regulation then. makes sense. I know Tigers always tend to suspend their own players internally if they think theres a real case to answer. It would be utterly insane of Northampton to play him this weekend given the severity of this incident.

I agree with that PSW, I know that London Irish have done the same and given an internal ban when it was clear that a ban from the disciplinary panel was going to be the outcome of the citing.

If Saints are stupid enough to play Clark this week they might as well forget about numbering his jersey and just stick a whacking great target it on it instead.

I would be surprised if his team mates wanted to play with him.
Even they are probably just as disgusted with his actions as we are.

Blackett tend to be hard but fair. If he deems it was a deliberate act he'll throw the book at him. I suppose there isn't any recommended sanction for deliberately breaking someone's arm. Therefore no maximum.

So is it now becoming more conclusive that Saints have a serious problem with Discipline?

If Mallinder had any pretensions about the England job inaction over this could scupper him completely. I think the RFU have seen the light re discipline with Lancaster's approach.

maestegmafia wrote:So is it now becoming more conclusive that Saints have a serious problem with Discipline?

I'm not 100% sure if that's a WUM (and if it's not i'm sorry) but please leave it out of this thread.

nathan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:So is it now becoming more conclusive that Saints have a serious problem with Discipline?

I'm not 100% sure if that's a WUM (and if it's not i'm sorry) but please leave it out of this thread.

Not intending to wind anyone up but I knew it would. Thing is though Saints have had an awful season for discipline this year. Ashton hair pulling now Clarke braking Hawkings arm.

Maest,

The Ashton hair pulling thing was hardly the most appalling case in history was it. London Irish managed to get two guys cited in one day earlier this season for offences in that range.
Wales have played a lot less games than Saints in the last 6 months and managed to get two players banned for serious foul play ( glass houses etc)

This is something quite different. I dont see it a massively relevant that Northampton as a club are dirty cheating are full of dirty cheating poopoo's who incite poor innocent Samons to punch the hell out of them.


Joking aside im not sure their disciplinary record is worse than other clubs, prior to this. This kind of puts them in a special place all on their own.

Wales also clearly have a serious discipline problem, Warburton upending Clerc and then Davis' assault in the Ireland game. I'd also mention that these offences are far more serious than Ashtons hair pulling and a case could be made that a broken neck/back is worse than a fractured elbow. You really need to let your hatred of Saints slide Maestag its becoming tiresome.

Anyway back to the case in hand, as a Saints fan im pretty disgusted by Clarks actions, i would have no complaints if he gets banned for a few years. This doesn't belong in the game and I really hope that Mallinder leaves Clark out of any squad until he gets the ban he deserves.

Well said Frosties.

I was interested to see what Saints fans reaction to the citing was so ventured onto the Saints board on rugbynetwork...

http://www.rugbynetwork.net/boards/read/s99.htm?101,13148895

No it's not well said at all. You cant try and deflect from this serious incident by saying that somebody else's national side could have caused serious injury.

This lad deliberately broke another players arm and should be severely punished for it.

to be fair to other posters, this season, Saints' discipline, even if they haven't received numerous citings, hasn't been great, and at the moment they have a number of players with a pretty bad rep.

However this Clark incident is on a whole other level, and I can't for one second, feel that Saints as such a good club, condone anything even close to that sort of behaviour.

Ozzy - that message board seems more rational than the oficial Saints one. ON that one, barely any of the Saints posters think he's done anything wrong.

rugbydreamer wrote:to be fair to other posters, this season, Saints' discipline, even if they haven't received numerous citings, hasn't been great, and at the moment they have a number of players with a pretty bad rep.

However this Clark incident is on a whole other level, and I can't for one second, feel that Saints as such a good club, condone anything even close to that sort of behaviour.

Ozzy - that message board seems more rational than the oficial Saints one. ON that one, barely any of the Saints posters think he's done anything wrong.

and on the NH one they branded al us tigers supporters as idiots! I dont think i've ever been so hurt! lol

Can anybody remember a citing similar to this ? and what was the punishment dished out .