RFU takes a lead making Changes to reduce the number of cited players..!

After a season of bad press with numerous high profile players cited for pulling players off the pitch by their hair, eye gouging, fish hooking and breaking arms of the helpless the RFU has decided to reduce the amount of time dithering about with matters of misbehaviour.

Now teams have just 24 hours to submit a citing to the RFU. Hearings will be within 48 hours.

Will this reduce bad behaviour or just reduce citings?

Neither.

It will just get the punishments meted out quicker.

Of course that interpretation spoils what seems to have become your aim this season - to trash english rugby. I remember you as a balanced poster - I take the Summer off from the boards and you have turned into a troll.

Is this just in the Prem? As I thought the IRB had got rid of the timings for submitting complaints, or at least lengthened them.

To be honest all I can see is less citings being lodged, can't imagine there'll be any change in players behavior.

LondonTiger wrote:Neither.

It will just get the punishments meted out quicker.

Of course that interpretation spoils what seems to have become your aim this season - to trash english rugby. I remember you as a balanced poster - I take the Summer off from the boards and you have turned into a troll.

I think that's just rose tinted memory there LT. I don't think anything's changed we just get used to it after a while. After all the Prem does have Hersh.

Hardly LT, add some maturity please.

I am angry at this decision. It doesn't deal with the issues at hand. Last season had some very poor incidents of bad behaviour, the RFU had to do something and I'm not sure why they think this will help encourage good behaviour.

The only thing I can see it do is reduce the time for collating evidence thus making citings less likely.

It will reduce citings, it won't reduce incidents of bad brhaviour

CBA to look it up be Im sure I read they are doing this is response to a new directive from the IRB which will come into force soon, any player when cited will be banned till their hearing is held. The idea is to speed up the entire process.
When you combine it with the new on the field TMO powers it kinda makes sense. there should be a lot less citings, especially for BS cases.

Genuine cases will get heard and dealt with quickly, and rather than accusations being made in the press days later they can be dealt with by the people involved on the pitch or immediately after ...not as the result of media pressure.

Acknowledging the press influence would be reasonable if that was realistically a factor. I'm sure the RFU citing commissioner is Very rarely swayed more by evidence than Mick Cleary, Stuart Barnes or Paul Ackford's opinions.

It does rather seem though that this new directive is designed not to approach the initial cause of citings which is bad behaviour on the pitch.

Will this process spot more? Unlikely

Will this give fairer more accurate trials? No

Will this discourage players from stupid dangerous unnecessary behaviour on the pitch? I can't think why it would make any difference at all.

It will reduce the lobbying window available to Barnes & Ackford, thus speeding them up a little.

It will speed it up, and thats good.

But to cut out bad behaviourour (in rugby and all walks of life)

Its not the severity of punishment that deters people, but the certainty of punishment.

I can't see this will make a great deal of difference bar sorting things out quickly rather than letting them drag on. However, the changes in the use of the TMO referenced above probably will reduce on pitch incidents.

Very good point Kingshu.

Will this new super fast process deliver more certainty and more consistency while quickening the process, decreasing the time to collect evidence, build your case etc..!

I don't think it will.

is it going to be super fast? it's only cutting out a day or two.

And is it meant to reduce acts of bad behaviour? No but then that's not it's job.

You don't need time to build a case. If a player says he had a finger in the eye then you can cite someone. You then have the time to the hearing to collect the evidence and build a case. Players will know this immediately after the game. The only one who needs time would be the games citing commissioner who has to rely of video rather than player testimony (again just for the citing not the hearing). Of course the OP said clubs only had 1 day to cite a player. Nothing was mentioned about the citing commissioner.

You do seem desperate to turn this into the RFU going easy on players

If maesteg had read (and not written) this post about the WRU or another union other than the RFU he would be crying 'don't feed the WUM'.

Hyprocrisy and more anti-English wumming from maesteg. Pathetic.

This combined with the new review process means that less stupid cases will be heard and the process streamlined, the resources can and time can be used more effectively to deal with the serious cases rather than some of the non events that have clogged things up over the last few years.

I'm happy for him to put all these posts up. I learn more about the RFU from maesteg's posts than everyone else's put together

From a slightly different perspective another benefit of the reduced time for citings and hearings is that it reduces the impact of the media on the outcome. It's my view that a number of citings and bans in recent years have been decided by how much/little fuss is made by the rags afterwards. If the citing officer and panel only have limited time it also restricts the amout of tripe that journalists can write before the case is heard and the punishment dished out.

HammerofThunor wrote:I'm happy for him to put all these posts up. I learn more about the RFU from maesteg's posts than everyone else's put together

All with a very special slant on them

I find I learn more about Maesteg than I need to.

yappysnap wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:I'm happy for him to put all these posts up. I learn more about the RFU from maesteg's posts than everyone else's put together

All with a very special slant on them

The fact I see Measteg tending to put a positive spin of Welsh news and a negative spin on English news probably has as much to do with my bias as his.

You are far far too sensible for a forum Thunor

yappysnap wrote:You are far far too sensible for a forum Thunor

Sorry