Hartley cited - again!

Dylan Hartley has been cited allegedly for punching Rory Best in the HC game last Friday. There's a clip up on www.rugbydump.com which gives a pretty good view - started off with a bit of handbags between the two hookers but then Hartley first punched and then dropped his elbow into Best's face before being pulled off by Afoa. Doesn't look good especially given Hartley's dismal record. Don't know what the scale of bans are for this sort of stuff, but if found guilty by the beaks Hartley with his record (26 week ban for gouging and 8 week ban for biting) could be looking at a good few weeks on the sideline.

Man, rugbydump is such a terrible blog!

There were four great tries scored in that game, and the one thing they highlight is a scuffle off the ball.

Basically, thats their MO. They have an interest in rugby as background context for an occasional fight. Just chasing page hits. It's a worthless waste of bandwidth in truth.

Notch wrote:Man, rugbydump is such a terrible blog!

There were four great tries scored in that game, and the one thing they highlight is a scuffle off the ball.

Basically, thats their MO. They have an interest in rugby as background context for an occasional fight. Just chasing page hits. It's a worthless waste of bandwidth in truth.

Ah Nothc, stop sitting on the fence, tell us how you REALLY feel!

Under the IRB Recommended Sanctions, Law 10.4 (a) (striking another player) carries the following penalties: Low End: 2 weeks; Mid Range: 5 weeks; Top End: 8+ to 52 weeks.

Got this from rugbydump.com

One would assume off the ball incident, 2 elbows and a clean strike to the head, taking into account Hartley's record, he's looking at mid/top end sanction? Or is this likely to be a low end due to no injury?

Notch wrote:Man, rugbydump is such a terrible blog!

There were four great tries scored in that game, and the one thing they highlight is a scuffle off the ball.

Basically, thats their MO. They have an interest in rugby as background context for an occasional fight. Just chasing page hits. It's a worthless waste of bandwidth in truth.

yeah because they only ever show fights....

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:One would assume off the ball incident, 2 elbows and a clean strike to the head, taking into account Hartley's record, he's looking at mid/top end sanction? Or is this likely to be a low end due to no injury?

England need him for the 6N so only a short ban so he is not rusty for the competition

nathan wrote:

Notch wrote:Man, rugbydump is such a terrible blog!

There were four great tries scored in that game, and the one thing they highlight is a scuffle off the ball.

Basically, thats their MO. They have an interest in rugby as background context for an occasional fight. Just chasing page hits. It's a worthless waste of bandwidth in truth.

yeah because they only ever show fights....

Yeah, pretty much man. They show fights, big hits. And then occasionally they get to the rugby. Right- three stroies on their main page about the Heineken Cup.

1. Dylan Hartley cited
2. Doug Howlett big hit (legal)
3. Lloyd Williams red card

And not a single Heineken Cup try.

TJ wrote:

UlstermaninGlasgow wrote:One would assume off the ball incident, 2 elbows and a clean strike to the head, taking into account Hartley's record, he's looking at mid/top end sanction? Or is this likely to be a low end due to no injury?

England need him for the 6N so only a short ban so he is not rusty for the competition

The ERC citing panel is unlikely to be headed up by an Englishman. I suspect that Hartley will be lucky to get off with less than 5 weeks with his poor record in front of the beak though.

Lancaster ought to be thinking hard about a substitute hooker.

betcha he only gets a very short ban

brennomac wrote:Dylan Hartley has been cited allegedly for punching Rory Best

The video shows Hartley hitting Best. The citing is because the video shows Hartley hitting Best. There is no alleging involved.

They will use the word allegedly until the hearing, as he might be cleared.

Informally, he won't be. He might get off sure, but they'll acknowledge he hit him. We can all see that.

They'll just the word allegedly until the evidence is actually examined.

Hartley is a dirty fecker for sure, but seriously, that is a real low end incident. They are on the ground, Best is on top, and impedes Hartley getting up (no idea if intentionally or not), they roll around a bit and Hartley is on top and Best holds on to him so Hartley forearm smashes him in the face, then there's a a bit of cuddling before Big John Afoa dives in and sorts it out.

What load of fecking nonsense.

I'd not seen it before today and from some of what has been spouted in a number of places I assumed that Hartley had gone to town on Best. it's a 2 week entry point for striking, couple of weeks added because Hartley is a tool, then halved for a guilty plea and not eating the biscuits, arriving back at 2 weeks.

As P Divvy once said, "it's not ballet". Move along people, nothing to see here.

Notch wrote:

nathan wrote:

Notch wrote:Man, rugbydump is such a terrible blog!

There were four great tries scored in that game, and the one thing they highlight is a scuffle off the ball.

Basically, thats their MO. They have an interest in rugby as background context for an occasional fight. Just chasing page hits. It's a worthless waste of bandwidth in truth.

yeah because they only ever show fights....

Yeah, pretty much man. They show fights, big hits. And then occasionally they get to the rugby. Right- three stroies on their main page about the Heineken Cup.

1. Dylan Hartley cited
2. Doug Howlett big hit (legal)
3. Lloyd Williams red card

And not a single Heineken Cup try.

Ah come on, be fair! There are highlights of games i never get to watch in the rabo and the top 14. Also you do realize they put up what people request.

maestegmafia wrote:

brennomac wrote:Dylan Hartley has been cited allegedly for punching Rory Best

The video shows Hartley hitting Best. The citing is because the video shows Hartley hitting Best. There is no alleging involved.

Well yes there is until the case has been heard

TJ wrote:betcha he only gets a very short ban

If so it'll be because the Welsh/Scottish/Irish/French/Italian discipline panel decided that's what he deserves. We seemed to do OK in the AI without him, I'd also like to see Lancaster drop him from the squad for being a dick.

Aside from that I reckon it'll be 4 weeks. Low entry with a double for him being experienced international and bad record.

Ozzy3213 wrote:Hartley is a dirty fecker for sure, but seriously, that is a real low end incident. They are on the ground, Best is on top, and impedes Hartley getting up (no idea if intentionally or not), they roll around a bit and Hartley is on top and Best holds on to him so Hartley forearm smashes him in the face, then there's a a bit of cuddling before Big John Afoa dives in and sorts it out.

What load of fecking nonsense.

I'd not seen it before today and from some of what has been spouted in a number of places I assumed that Hartley had gone to town on Best. it's a 2 week entry point for striking, couple of weeks added because Hartley is a tool, then halved for a guilty plea and not eating the biscuits, arriving back at 2 weeks.

As P Divvy once said, "it's not ballet". Move along people, nothing to see here.

One-eyed as ever. If strikes become acceptable then what's next, tip tackles? The rules are there for fairplay and the players safety. Well done to the citing commisioner for flagging it up. If only there was more consistentcy, if only.

On the weekend I read the views of the Saints fans on this matter, which was that Best first struck at Hartley. The video evidence shows nothing of the sort. It's lucky I stopped taking Northampton and their fans seriously a long time ago.

Keep banging the drum morg, keep banging the drum.

Spoiler:

Ozzy3213 wrote:They are on the ground, Best is on top, and impedes Hartley getting up (no idea if intentionally or not),

When watching the video it looks like Best tries to get up and get away and Hartley trips him, Hartley then wrestles Best to the ground and starts throwing fists and elbows.

Nothing here...? This idiot is an England Captain and their regular first choice Hooker, Captain of one of Englands biggest clubs, meant to be a possible Lion...?

The guy is doing nothing to prove himself other than a thug. Third hearing coming up, previous bans for two counts of eye gouging in 2007 and biting a player earlier this year.

Two offences in one year...! He is in big trouble. Unlikely to get a lions call now, he has proved Gatland to be completely right about what he said of him before.

How anyone can accuse best of doing anything is laughable. He is clearly trying to get up and Hartley takes issue with this and drags him to the ground.

Hore got five weeks for one punch. Now I agree that it was a hit of handbags but dropping His elbow like that is intended to cause harm or does Best have to be concussed or fracture his cheekbone before it becomes serious?

Given his previous record I wouldn't expect to him before the new year.

Standulstermen wrote:How anyone can accuse best of doing anything is laughable. He is clearly trying to get up and Hartley takes issue with this and drags him to the ground.

Hore got five weeks for one punch. Now I agree that it was a hit of handbags but dropping His elbow like that is intended to cause harm or does Best have to be concussed or fracture his cheekbone before it becomes serious?

Given his previous record I wouldn't expect to him before the new year.

He'll be back in a week, England players never get big bans.

I actually think of all the governing bodies that the erc come down the hardest on foul play. The Rabo is a joke as is the aviva.

Maes

Telling me to 'watch the video' when it's obvious from what I have posted that I have watched it, is pretty condescending mate.



Harltey's previous form is irrelevant in relation to this incident until the panel have made a decision as to his guilt. If they decide he is guilty, his form will earn him some extra weeks. He is clearly guilty of striking another player, which as per the laws is a red card offence, so on that basis the citing is correct, and to be honest I would expect a guilty plea. That will ensure that whatever is added for him being a bit of a tool is also taken off for not contesting it. I guess the only real question is where the panel see the entry point. For me it is low end. Hartley having form does not make it mid or top end, that decision is based solely on the incident, not the person.

Incidentally, what do people think the referee would have done had he seen the incident? Having watched a lot of rugby, my view is that the referee would have issued a yellow card and not a red. I'm not sure where that would have left the citing process, as if the referee has said yellow then I don't know if the citing commissioner can do anything, as the offence has to pass the red card test to be cited.

Ozzy3213 wrote:
Incidentally, what do people think the referee would have done had he seen the incident? Having watched a lot of rugby, my view is that the referee would have issued a yellow card and not a red. I'm not sure where that would have left the citing process, as if the referee has said yellow then I don't know if the citing commissioner can do anything, as the offence has to pass the red card test to be cited.

I suspect the best refs out there if they had a clear view would see this as a RC because Hartley makes contact with the head; quite a few would have gone yellow though. You can be cited and banned however even if given a YC during the match - something rugby gets right over soccer (where if the ref has seen the incident then that's that, even if he's completely misjudged it) - e.g. Bradley Davies against Ireland, or any other of the numerous spear tackles which have been "upgraded" from an on-field YC.

It's obvious that Hartley planned this asault months ago when the fixtures came out. He has been stalking Best and has pictures of him on the wall in a secret room in his house. From the first whistle you can see him chasing Best and when he catches him he beats the living daylights out of him and should be banned for life.......Oh hang on I've just seen the other camera angle - just a bit of rugby handbags, nothing in it.

I must learn not to jump to conclusions.

It looks pretty bad. When it becomes too awkward to throw punches he reverts to elbows and forearms. It looked very like the cage fighting technique you see when those guys get into that position.
I wonder if Hartley does a bit of that on the side as it was pretty seemless? I know a lot of the players practice Judo to complement their rugby training.

Notch wrote:They will use the word allegedly until the hearing, as he might be cleared.

Informally, he won't be. He might get off sure, but they'll acknowledge he hit him. We can all see that.

They'll just the word allegedly until the evidence is actually examined.

The OP uses the word "Alleged", the media and citing commissioner do not and have not.

maestegmafia wrote:

Notch wrote:They will use the word allegedly until the hearing, as he might be cleared.

Informally, he won't be. He might get off sure, but they'll acknowledge he hit him. We can all see that.

They'll just the word allegedly until the evidence is actually examined.

The OP uses the word "Alleged", the media and citing commissioner do not and have not.

Using "alleged" is quite common in reporting of both criminal and civil cases that have not yet been decided Maes, which is probably why the OP used it. It's really not worth getting a bee in your bonnet about.

Cheers Pete,

No bee in my bonnet...!

.

offload wrote:It's obvious that Hartley planned this asault months ago when the fixtures came out. He has been stalking Best and has pictures of him on the wall in a secret room in his house. From the first whistle you can see him chasing Best and when he catches him he beats the living daylights out of him and should be banned for life.......Oh hang on I've just seen the other camera angle - just a bit of rugby handbags, nothing in it.

I must learn not to jump to conclusions.

Got to be a sad Saints supporter .

Ozzy3213 wrote:Hartley is a dirty fecker for sure, but seriously, that is a real low end incident. They are on the ground, Best is on top, and impedes Hartley getting up (no idea if intentionally or not), they roll around a bit and Hartley is on top and Best holds on to him so Hartley forearm smashes him in the face, then there's a a bit of cuddling before Big John Afoa dives in and sorts it out.

What load of fecking nonsense.

I'd not seen it before today and from some of what has been spouted in a number of places I assumed that Hartley had gone to town on Best. it's a 2 week entry point for striking, couple of weeks added because Hartley is a tool, then halved for a guilty plea and not eating the biscuits, arriving back at 2 weeks.

As P Divvy once said, "it's not ballet". Move along people, nothing to see here.

All of this attention is because it's Dylan Hartley, not because of what happened. And he'll get two weeks where if he hadn't had the record he might get off with a wee slap. Everyone loves running the guy down, because lets face it- he is what he is. He's quite an unpopular player for very good reasons, and thats mainly on his own head.

It's blown out of proportion but yeah- you've called this incident bang on Pete. 100%. He'll get two weeks and the questions about whether he has the temperament to represent the Lions are well founded and will be asked until them.

If I'm speaking personally- I don't think he's worth a place on the tour anymore. His team was in a tough spot, nothing going right for them- they needed their Captain more than anything. What did they get? A two-bit brawler. Who are England touring in the summer?

I did see on Twitter that Hartley is likely to plead guilty to the charge of allegedly striking Best. So whatever punishment he gets is liable to be reduced for that. Also previous citings only come into consideration if they are for a similar offence no? But his disciplinary record can be taken into account, i.e. he is unlikely to get any leniency for good behavior due to his past yellow/red cards.

Yes guys, you allegedly assault someone, however, you either strike someone or not. They are not the same thing. The video shows him strinking best. That is not subjective. What is subjective in the intent and context.

The Guardian did a set of ads in the 80s/early 90s in which a 'skinhead type' appears to randomly attack some guy. You see it from three angles and come to the same conclusion, then the 4th in a pan shot where falling masonry would have hit the bystander had the skinhead not reacted. Context.

Janecory wrote:

offload wrote:It's obvious that Hartley planned this asault months ago when the fixtures came out. He has been stalking Best and has pictures of him on the wall in a secret room in his house. From the first whistle you can see him chasing Best and when he catches him he beats the living daylights out of him and should be banned for life.......Oh hang on I've just seen the other camera angle - just a bit of rugby handbags, nothing in it.

I must learn not to jump to conclusions.

Got to be a sad Saints supporter .

No actually - not a fan of Saints or Hartley. I'm a fan of REAL rugby. Not the watered down shoite I spend my time watching these days. I don't condone violence, but this is a physical game played on the edge and when I see a player disciplined for faking a headbut and another rolling on the ground like a football oik trying to get an opponent sent off, I despair at what the game has become. And while I'm at it - bring back proper rucking !! Makes me laugh when the ref keeps shouting "ruck, ruck". Most refs these days would urine their pants if they ever saw a REAL ruck.

Notch wrote:

Ozzy3213 wrote:Hartley is a dirty fecker for sure, but seriously, that is a real low end incident. They are on the ground, Best is on top, and impedes Hartley getting up (no idea if intentionally or not), they roll around a bit and Hartley is on top and Best holds on to him so Hartley forearm smashes him in the face, then there's a a bit of cuddling before Big John Afoa dives in and sorts it out.

What load of fecking nonsense.

I'd not seen it before today and from some of what has been spouted in a number of places I assumed that Hartley had gone to town on Best. it's a 2 week entry point for striking, couple of weeks added because Hartley is a tool, then halved for a guilty plea and not eating the biscuits, arriving back at 2 weeks.

As P Divvy once said, "it's not ballet". Move along people, nothing to see here.

All of this attention is because it's Dylan Hartley, not because of what happened. And he'll get two weeks where if he hadn't had the record he might get off with a wee slap. Everyone loves running the guy down, because lets face it- he is what he is. He's quite an unpopular player for very good reasons, and thats mainly on his own head.

It's blown out of proportion but yeah- you've called this incident bang on Pete. 100%. He'll get two weeks and the questions about whether he has the temperament to represent the Lions are well founded and will be asked until them.

If I'm speaking personally- I don't think he's worth a place on the tour anymore. His team was in a tough spot, nothing going right for them- they needed their Captain more than anything. What did they get? A two-bit brawler. Who are England touring in the summer?

Argentina. That's may view on it as well Notch.

I can't really see Youngs going on Lions (it says a lot about the current state of hookers if he does). Hopefully he goes to Argentina. I'm hoping Haywood gets a run with Saints now. I've been impressed with him in the last couple of season.

2 weeks.

Low entry point.

1 week added because he has been a halyon before and then removed again because he pleaded guilty and didn't eat too many biscuits.

hmmm, now I seem to recall somebody predicting exactly that MrsP, I wonder who that could have been?!?!?

Me! Me! Me me me me?

Get Jim Hamilton onto him !!!!

Ozzy3213 wrote:hmmm, now I seem to recall somebody predicting exactly that MrsP, I wonder who that could have been?!?!?

You called it dead on mate! I said at the time. And I hope that know we can all just calm down and let this slide.

If Saints lose, they are out of the Heineken Cup and he watched it happen from the sidelines. If Saints get a momentous win and stay alive in the competition he wasn't part of it and can take no credit. He might not even get his place back.

Either way, the punishment more than fits the crime. So I'm done with running the guy down. There's a big rugby game at Ravenhill I'd rather chat about than go on a witchhunt.

Ozzy3213 wrote:hmmm, now I seem to recall somebody predicting exactly that MrsP, I wonder who that could have been?!?!?

Nobody likes a smart Ozzy. You should know better Alec

I can't comment on it as my Internet isn't suitable to look at it (yet), but I am a little confused as to how the ban is the equivalent of Jevon Groves' for a late tackle (albeit he got a red), as it doesn't sound too bad an offence from either. Strange how the bans match up though, given one was a red.

I see the other game he misses is quins at franklins gardens! Talk about key games

Standulstermen wrote:I see the other game he misses is quins at franklins gardens! Talk about key games

Absolutely. Winning their next two games could really turn their season around, losing them both would be a crushing blow to morale.

And either way, due to a self-enforced absence, Hartley can't take any credit if they win and will have to take some of the blame as Club Captain if they lose for taking himself out of the equation.

100% sure the punishment fits the crime, certainly anything more would be excessive.

Well thats laid to rest.

Only thing left is that Saints said they will punish Hartley which they have done by banning him, when the ERC have done the same.

Do English clubs not fine their players for improper behaviour? It might be either a good way to stop Hartley from committing these incidents, and some good guaranteed revenue for the club...?