Cian Healy - cited

First topic message reminder :

In other news the Pope is a Catholic (for now at least).

Espnscrum has the hearing set for Wednesday. Predictions on a post card. He may well live to regret a few moments of madness.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:You're right, it's not exactly what he said but it is the essence of what he tweeted - it's quite easy to find.

I think "eventually missed the correct amount of games" is quite a good clue, don't you?

When did he say that? The only tweet I saw from him said "it should have been the first three weeks" nothing about the correct amount of games. Are you making things up?

England have had plenty too-


Hartley (biting, gouging and other's)
Grewcock (stamping, punching)
Clark (punching, arm breaking)
Hazell (punching, kneeing)
Ashton(hair pulling, high tackling, shoulder charging)

red_stag wrote:Ireland has had plenty of thugs.

01 Peter Clohessy (stamped on players head)
02 Jerry Flannery (stamped on players head)
03 John Hayes (stamped on players head)
04
05 Paul O'Connell (punched a player)
06 Trevor Brennan (punched a fan)
07 Alan Quinlan (eye gouger)
08 Jamie Heaslip (kneed a player in the head)

Rugby is a gentlemans game played by thugs.

Whats big deal (except Dylan Hartley and Callum Clark: I don't like them )

What Clohessy did was the worst I have seen from any Irish player probably followed by Brennan punching a fan. Dont think Quinlan's "gouge" was intentended to target the eye area but its history now anyway.

Hayes and O'Connells jig on Healy's head must have hurt a lot.

I did the same thing Heaslip did on occasion. Not great I must admit.

Hartley is in a league of his own IMO.

Losing the plot is lashing out at the breakdown or throwing a punch or starting a fight.

By the age of 26 he has multiple accounts of serious foul play - biting players (8 week ban), eye gouging (26 week ban) and punching (2 week ban).

Ive never seen a coach speak out about an individual in the manner that Gatland did about Hartley where he called his character into question.

Single one off incidents are different to these actions time and again. Hartley belongs in categories like Danny Grewcock.

When Healy has more to add that a once off incident I'll take comparing him and Hartley seriously.

Yes Clohessys stamp was horrendous. Really really really bad. REALLY bad.

GunsGerms wrote:

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:You're right, it's not exactly what he said but it is the essence of what he tweeted - it's quite easy to find.

I think "eventually missed the correct amount of games" is quite a good clue, don't you?

When did he say that? The only tweet I saw from him said "it should have been the first three weeks" nothing about the correct amount of games. Are you making things up?

9.19 pm Thu, Feb 28 in response to a tweet suggesting that he set a good example to young people.

That's assuming that I'm looking at the account of the correct Cian Healy and that it hasn't been hacked.

red_stag wrote:Yes Clohessys stamp was horrendous. Really really really bad. REALLY bad.

I watched it live and was shocked. I have done dirty things but that is above and way beyone anything I have ever seen. It was sickening.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:You're right, it's not exactly what he said but it is the essence of what he tweeted - it's quite easy to find.

I think "eventually missed the correct amount of games" is quite a good clue, don't you?

When did he say that? The only tweet I saw from him said "it should have been the first three weeks" nothing about the correct amount of games. Are you making things up?

9.19 pm Thu, Feb 28 in response to a tweet suggesting that he set a good example to young people.

That's assuming that I'm looking at the account of the correct Cian Healy and that it hasn't been hacked.

Fair enough if its out there but I havent seen any such tweet. I think he would be well advised to lay off twitter to be honest if he is going to say stupid things. Not a fan of Healy of Heaslips fondness for Twitter. Most of the time its harmless but they sometimes do it when involved with squads etc. If I was tweeting in work Id probably get a warning. Should be no different for them.

You've got to get your first tackle in early, even if it's late.
-Welsh hard man Ray Gravell explains his rugby philosophy.

Roughing up opposition has always been part of the game.

Can anyone from B&I claim they arent at least a little proud of the infamous 99 call?

So, on your logic, how do Cole's actions equate to the '74 Springboks?

yeah hartley has done some proper nasty stuff.

I am not going to back him up as an england fan.

Cole on the other hand is a pro on the pitch and he has my respect.

If you havent been caught with your trousers down after a drink you havent lived!

red_stag wrote:Hartley is in a league of his own IMO.

Losing the plot is lashing out at the breakdown or throwing a punch or starting a fight.

By the age of 26 he has multiple accounts of serious foul play - biting players (8 week ban), eye gouging (26 week ban) and punching (2 week ban).

Ive never seen a coach speak out about an individual in the manner that Gatland did about Hartley where he called his character into question.

Single one off incidents are different to these actions time and again. Hartley belongs in categories like Danny Grewcock.

When Healy has more to add that a once off incident I'll take comparing him and Hartley seriously.

He doesnt even register on the Chris Halaufia scale, he just got his 6th ban in a little over 3 years.

I agree comparing Healy to regular offenders like Hartley is ridiculous...it was very out of character for the guy although he did lose it in that match ( there were 3 violent incidents he couldve been at least carded for). Only he will know what made him snap.

The Gatland thing ...oh come on that was clearly an attempt to undermine the player and put pressure on him. Nor is it by any stretch the first time a coach has questioned a players character or temperament, indeed the english made a habit fior years of questioning the entire french pack.

So I agree with half of what you say, the other half is exaggerated to support that point. Hartley is panto villain and an easy get out to defend others misdemeanour's.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

red_stag wrote:Hartley is in a league of his own IMO.

Losing the plot is lashing out at the breakdown or throwing a punch or starting a fight.

By the age of 26 he has multiple accounts of serious foul play - biting players (8 week ban), eye gouging (26 week ban) and punching (2 week ban).

Ive never seen a coach speak out about an individual in the manner that Gatland did about Hartley where he called his character into question.

Single one off incidents are different to these actions time and again. Hartley belongs in categories like Danny Grewcock.

When Healy has more to add that a once off incident I'll take comparing him and Hartley seriously.

He doesnt even register on the Chris Halaufia scale, he just got his 6th ban in a little over 3 years.

I agree comparing Healy to regular offenders like Hartley is ridiculous...it was very out of character for the guy although he did lose it in that match ( there were 3 violent incidents he couldve been at least carded for). Only he will know what made him snap.

The Gatland thing ...oh come on that was clearly an attempt to undermine the player and put pressure on him. Nor is it by any stretch the first time a coach has questioned a players character or temperament, indeed the english made a habit fior years of questioning the entire french pack.

So I agree with half of what you say, the other half is exaggerated to support that point. Hartley is panto villain and an easy get out to defend others misdemeanour's.

To count Hartley's biting ban against him without acknowledging the role that Fish-hook Ferris took in the proceedings is a little disingenuous. The harshness of that decision makes a neat counterpoint to the leniency of Stomper Healy's, as does the acceptance of the decision by Hartley/RFU compared to Healy/IRFU's appeal. There's further similarities in that Healy previously suffered a confirmed stamping from Hayes, whilst Hartley suffered a biting from an Ulster player (unconfirmed and summarily dismissed by the ref).

Hartley's propensity for eyeballs in his youth is indefensible, as were the forearms to Best. His response to Gatland's goading was exemplary.

Hartley is a niggle player who sometimes oversteps the mark. His gouging is a good example, but he did pay the price with a ban that was fairly harsh for the time. All reference, tho', to the biting incident is total BS. He was fish-hooked and responded in the correct fashion, I support 100% his response and couldn't care less about the opinions that blame him for that. Suck it up (no pun intended).

As for Healy - he acted like a tw&t and got off lightly. He doesn't have a record for it but let's see how his behaviour develops before too much self-righteous indignation.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:To count Hartley's biting ban against him without acknowledging the role that Fish-hook Ferris took in the proceedings is a little disingenuous. The harshness of that decision makes a neat counterpoint to the leniency of Stomper Healy's, as does the acceptance of the decision by Hartley/RFU compared to Healy/IRFU's appeal. There's further similarities in that Healy previously suffered a confirmed stamping from Hayes, whilst Hartley suffered a biting from an Ulster player (unconfirmed and summarily dismissed by the ref).

Hartley's propensity for eyeballs in his youth is indefensible, as were the forearms to Best. His response to Gatland's goading was exemplary.

The Citing Commission can only convict on evidence - they are the ones who acknowledge other player's actions and mitigating circumstances.

she'll be counting 20 pages when she comes...

Barney McGrew did it wrote:Hartley is a niggle player who sometimes oversteps the mark. His gouging is a good example, but he did pay the price with a ban that was fairly harsh for the time. All reference, tho', to the biting incident is total BS. He was fish-hooked and responded in the correct fashion, I support 100% his response and couldn't care less about the opinions that blame him for that. Suck it up (no pun intended).

As for Healy - he acted like a tw&t and got off lightly. He doesn't have a record for it but let's see how his behaviour develops before too much self-righteous indignation.

No evidence whatsoever that he was fish hooked, but don't let facts like that get in the way of your little rant.

We all know the type of player Hartley is. In my opinion he was fish hooked, despite the lack of direct video evidence. But that has no bearing on why Healy came into that match with neural synapses severely misfiring. The question for Healy is how he gets on from here. Especially since he is one of the favourites to play for the Lions. We all need him dominating the scrum, not the penalty box.

I wonder if there is a web site which has stats covering the most bans? Also the most yellow and red cards? Just for interest, mind.

Cudmore must be giving Ha'Alafia a run for his money re number of bans.

Surely Cudmore has to be the world's least friendly Canadian?

Ah sure if we are going to go on the unofficial claims we can add another dose of eye gouging (on Ross Ford) and a forearm smash to Richie McCaws head to Hartley.

As for the 26 week ban being harsh he gouged two Wasps players which was taken into account.

Dr Grey - Id be interested too. No idea if there is a site out there that has it.

I agree that Healy was out of line and I agree he got off lightly. But I'm just annoyed at somehow a once off incident has accelerated Healy in line with regular offenders like Hartley (something mentioned earlier in this thread).

No comparison whatsoever.

RedStag, I don't think anyone is saying Healy, at present is in Hartley's league, just that he lost it big time in this one match. The reason this threads gone on so long is, I think the insistence of some posters that he was provoked and what he did was excusable and therefore the one game ban, an appropriate punishment.

Ah its plain silly to claim it was excusable. He definitely should have been red carded for the stamp and a yellow for his fist of fury (red if they connected).

I think its equally silly though to claim that Healy/IRFU have somehow done something wrong by appealing the issue with the starting date.

The stupid disciplinary should have just said it was a four week ban and this thread would have about 1/10 the amount of comments.

red_stag wrote:Ah its plain silly to claim it was excusable. He definitely should have been red carded for the stamp and a yellow for his fist of fury (red if they connected).

I think its equally silly though to claim that Healy/IRFU have somehow done something wrong by appealing the issue with the starting date.

The stupid disciplinary should have just said it was a four week ban and this thread would have about 1/10 the amount of comments.

Can't argue with that

So this is what page 19 is like?

Cracking view from up here.

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:

red_stag wrote:Ah its plain silly to claim it was excusable. He definitely should have been red carded for the stamp and a yellow for his fist of fury (red if they connected).

I think its equally silly though to claim that Healy/IRFU have somehow done something wrong by appealing the issue with the starting date.

The stupid disciplinary should have just said it was a four week ban and this thread would have about 1/10 the amount of comments.

Can't argue with that

Ah gwan, there must be something in there you disagree with, if you really try...

Glas a du wrote:

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:

red_stag wrote:Ah its plain silly to claim it was excusable. He definitely should have been red carded for the stamp and a yellow for his fist of fury (red if they connected).

I think its equally silly though to claim that Healy/IRFU have somehow done something wrong by appealing the issue with the starting date.

The stupid disciplinary should have just said it was a four week ban and this thread would have about 1/10 the amount of comments.

Can't argue with that

Ah gwan, there must be something in there you disagree with, if you really try...

OK. I disagree the thread would be 1/10 as long. At one point we made a conscious decision to keep this going beyond all sanity. Only after that the disciplary panel accepted the appeal, which propagated the thread even longer. I think we probably would have made 16 or 17 pages.

Satisfied?

Pheck that lets find something to jabble on about.

Grey how is the rugby scene in NYC these days.

Its an Irish thread, They going for ever!!

All context freely deleted. All from this thread......

red_stag wrote:Pheck that lets find something to jabble on about.

Glas a du wrote:Sex. It's all about sex. Everything on these boards eventually boils down to the LCD - sex.

lostinwales wrote:I just thought it was a manly thread about manly men doing manly things?

GunsGerms wrote:Always found it fairly uncomfortable giving the prop a reach around when binding at the scrum. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Yes, sometimes, late at night...

maestegmafia wrote:Are you actually serious?

LondonTiger wrote:Dunno about the Dublin working girls, but I have heard that soho hookers charge extra for a bit of stamping when releasing odd shaped balls.

Gibson wrote:That's deep. Far too heavy for me.

Biltong wrote:I suspect this thread will still be running by the time Healy makes his next match for Ireland.

MrsP wrote:Well it will if people keep posting on it to ask why people keep posting on it!

Glas a du wrote:Healy's ban? Is that what this thread is about...

George Carlin wrote:Some people just do not have the discipline to stay off topic.

A "tour de farce"...

Great work, Doctor Grey.
It's like a Neil Simon script. All it needs is Jack Lemmon.

We're 68 posts away from the magic 1,000 now. Should we? Could we?

This is surely the 606v2 equivalent of the Filibuster.

So what has actually happened to Healy? I kind of lost the thread a few days back...

And why do Dragons refer to themselves as Turks?

This thread is now odds on to outlast the ban so to all contributors for this epic prolongation.

Some verbal Viagra has helped.

gregortree wrote:This thread is now odds on to outlast the ban so to all contributors for this epic prolongation.

Perhaps the Citing Commission took that into account? They obviously follow rugby fora and know that the matter will be debated ad nauseum on threads like this. To reach the widest audience with their message they have to make their ban a bit controversial, so for a decent lad like Healey they make it short, and for an arch villain like Hartley they make it long.

The Great Aukster wrote:Perhaps the Citing Commission took that into account? They obviously follow rugby............

you sure?

Rugby? Who said anything about Rugby?

The ban expired at midnight - so we win

Well, given Healy was banned for 80 minutes, we were always going to win that one.

Awwwww, surely its not all over now ?

Morally, we have definitely won. I am feeling more Welsh by the moment.

53 posts until the magic 1,000.

I wonder if Mrs Healy ever listens to the Elton John classic 'Cian You Feel The Love Tonight'?

...

George Carlin wrote:Morally, we have definitely won. I am feeling more Welsh by the moment.

53 posts until the magic 1,000.

I wonder if Mrs Healy ever listens to the Elton John classic 'Cian You Feel The Love Tonight'?

...

Bravo!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AdtR-d2HJQ

Maybe we should just get this moved to the pub threads? Took about it over a pint...

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xjLUWvJNrBA

George Carlin wrote:53 posts until the magic 1,000.

Serious question for which I immediately apologise. But where does 606v2 show how many posts or how many to go? Or even how many on a page?