Why wasn't this a red card?

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 9:31 am

If not - why on EARTH was it not cited and the thug Irish scumbag banned?

It is a flying headbutt to the neck and head.

Discrageful.

by Guest Fri Mar 21, 2014 9:35 am

Jeepers, flying headbutt alright, that's not cool. Was there any outcry during the game or has this footage only just come to light?

by san Fri Mar 21, 2014 9:54 am

'Discrageful' is certainly the word that describes it!

by Submachine Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:52 am

I'll spell it out clearly for you Chunky as your one eye may be a bit clouded

1. Healy attempts to clear Pacamoles from the ruck by going in as low as possible
2. Picamoles attempts to get out of the way which would result in Healy going off his feet and a penalty to France
3. Picamoles is not quick enough and does not retreat enough, resulting in a nasty bang on the noggin
4. Ref notices all this in real time and decides no case to answer
5. Citing commissioner reviews all of the above and decides no case to answer.

You'll probably take what I have to say with a pinch of salt but hey I'm just another Irish scumbag right?

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:54 am

Submachine wrote:You'll probably take what I have to say with a pinch of salt but hey I'm just another Irish scumbag right?

Yes it would seem so.

by Submachine Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:57 am

You're a class act.

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:01 pm

Submachine wrote:You're a class act.

Indeed. That's because I don't defend flying headbutts to the face.

by Submachine Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:04 pm

Would you care to rebut any of the points I made? Or does your hatred of the Irish prevent you from doing so?

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:09 pm

Submachine wrote:Would you care to rebut any of the points I made? Or does your hatred of the Irish prevent you from doing so?

You laughably think that " Picamoles attempts to get out of the way which would result in Healy going off his feet" while neglecting to realise that Healy is in mid air before he even comes anywhere near Picamoles.

Your mindset is "defend Ireland and Irish players at all cost". They can't have done anything wrong. Ever.

Healy could have broken Picamoles' neck, but apparently "Picamoles is not quick enough and does not retreat enough"

Silly Picamoles. Shouldn't have got in the way of Cian Healy's flying head.

"4. Ref notices all this in real time and decides no case to answer"..........

Well he actually gave a penalty. So he saw it. But decided that a flying headbutt to the face doesn't warrant any further attention. Only the referee and touch judge can say why they ignored this piece of disgusting thuggery.

"5. Citing commissioner reviews all of the above and decides no case to answer."

I am confident that he didn't even review it. Because he was too Poopie scared of causing a fuss after Ireland had gloriously won what was owed to them.

by lostinwales Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:14 pm

Submachine wrote:I'll spell it out clearly for you Chunky as your one eye may be a bit clouded

1. Healy attempts to clear Pacamoles from the ruck by going in as low as possible
2. Picamoles attempts to get out of the way which would result in Healy going off his feet and a penalty to France
3. Picamoles is not quick enough and does not retreat enough, resulting in a nasty bang on the noggin
4. Ref notices all this in real time and decides no case to answer
5. Citing commissioner reviews all of the above and decides no case to answer.

You'll probably take what I have to say with a pinch of salt but hey I'm just another Irish scumbag right?

This involves diving headfirst over the ruck does it? There are no arms involved and diving over the ruck is a penalty in itself. It is potentially dangerous play and should have been cited, even if they eventually decided to do nothing. Picamoles was behind the ruck as far as I can see. Accusing him of being responsible for getting headbutted for not getting his head out of the way is just, erm....

'clearing players from the ruck' seems to cover a multitude of sins these days. in the Eng/Ire match there was a point where the whistle was blown and THEN POM dived in on someone in the ruck.

by lostinwales Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:18 pm

I'd add that Walsh was already playing advantage to France. Healy's little effort wasnt the reason the penalty was given but it was one of several possible penalty offenses.

He is a terrific player, a real force of nature. But...
In all the talk of what happened last year with Cole it is worth remembering that for a while in that match he was more or less out of control. The red mist had descended and he was lucky he didnt get into more trouble. There is a fine line in all of this but he has been hanging around on the wrong side of that more than once.

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:21 pm

That this wasn't cited is nothing short of a disgrace.

by **Notch** Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:25 pm

I think it was a penalty advantage against Healy for going off his feet in the ruck, because thats what it looked like in real time. As if he thought the ball was out and he was going to dive on it. When you see the replay he could have a case to answer for foul play, which is infuriating if you're an Ireland fan given what it could have cost his team. You'd have been spitting mad if he had of got himself dismissed at that crucial point.

As an Ulster fan I'm pretty relaxed if he does get cited now, there would be worse things in the world for the other four teams chasing playoff places in the Pro12 than Healy missing a rake of Leinster matches.

But as per usual the people who want him cited are massively overstating the case and the people who are defending him aren't massively understating it. No arm clear out at the breakdown- maybe 1 or 2 weeks max. It was a physical game, these things happen. Slap on the wrist territory.

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:27 pm

Notch wrote: No arm clear out at the breakdown- maybe 1 or 2 weeks max. It was a physical game, these things happen. Slap on the wrist territory.

No.

It's a flying headbutt to the face.

It's a 10 weeker given his previous for dangerous play.

by **Notch** Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:37 pm

by Submachine Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:37 pm

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Submachine wrote:Would you care to rebut any of the points I made? Or does your hatred of the Irish prevent you from doing so?

You laughably think that " Picamoles attempts to get out of the way which would result in Healy going off his feet" while neglecting to realise that Healy is in mid air before he even comes anywhere near Picamoles.

What does that even mean? There is literally about a yard between when Healy starts his forward movement. Picamoles retreats as healy is in motion. If he had stayed where he was Healy would have wrapped him up and rolled him away.

Your mindset is "defend Ireland and Irish players at all cost". They can't have done anything wrong. Ever.

No I have often criticised Irish players but I would defend any player regarless of their nationality where the evidence is clear as it is here

Healy could have broken Picamoles' neck, but apparently "Picamoles is not quick enough and does not retreat enough"

Rugby is a contact sport resulting in serious injuries every year. This definitely could have reslted in a bad injury. Picamoles was probably quite tired at that point alright

Silly Picamoles. Shouldn't have got in the way of Cian Healy's flying head.

It is to be avoided if possible

"4. Ref notices all this in real time and decides no case to answer"..........

Well he actually gave a penalty. So he saw it. But decided that a flying headbutt to the face doesn't warrant any further attention. Only the referee and touch judge can say why they ignored this piece of disgusting thuggery.

Your question is why no red card? The penalty was for going off feet. He made contact with the back of the head not his face. You stated neck head in your OP. Why are you changing your argument?

"5. Citing commissioner reviews all of the above and decides no case to answer."

I am confident that he didn't even review it. Because he was too Poopie scared of causing a fuss after Ireland had gloriously won what was owed to them.

Thats just mental

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:48 pm

Submachine wrote:What does that even mean? There is literally about a yard between when Healy starts his forward movement. Picamoles retreats as healy is in motion. If he had stayed where he was Healy would have wrapped him up and rolled him away

If he had stayed where he was, it would have been even worse. Thankfully had the awareness to get out of the way of the thug's flying body or he would have been hospitalized.

"Picamoles attempts to get out of the way which would result in Healy going off his feet"

Healy is already off his feet when he starts to do his flying headbutt.

Why wasn't this a red card? Healys10

Your incredible defence of this piece of filth player is sickening.

by Submachine Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:56 pm

Yeah look I see what you're about now so good luck with that. Not gonna go round in circles.

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:57 pm

Sickening.

by Slow and Sedate Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:00 pm

The more I look at this the worse it seems. When watching on Saturday I was surprised that Healy was not binned. Not for the head butt, but for the diving over the top. I think once the try was scored Walsh forgot about the penalties on the line that Ireland conceded. He still could have binned Healy or another even though the advantage was over when the try was scored - and that's for the penalties conceded on their line.

Initially it was hard to pick up the flying butt on the coverage, but a close up showed it. I can understand why Walsh & the TJ didn't see it clearly, but this is surely why there are citing officers and I can't believe that they didn't want to review this, even if he was cleared following a hearing. Others have been cleared after a citing so it wouldn't be a given that he was banned.

However, no matter what we keyboard warriors think, the powers that be have decided that Healy has no case to answer and therefore is innocent of wrong doing and we have to stand by this even if our thoughts differ Hug

by R!skysports Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:08 pm

I thought it should have been a yellow - and maybe a red

by Rory_Gallagher Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:29 pm

Piece of filth, scumbag, thug.. what a plonker and a keyboard warrior. Very easy to say such things about people when they aren't there to hear it or defend themselves. What Healy did was extremely clumsy and stupid but I highly highly doubt he was trying to injure anyone. To attack the man's character when you know absolutely nothing about him is just pathetic.

Like I said, keyboard warrior, so go ahead and have your fun. It says a lot about you. thumbsup

by lostinwales Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:49 pm

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Piece of filth, scumbag, thug.. what a plonker and a keyboard warrior. Very easy to say such things about people when they aren't there to hear it or defend themselves. What Healy did was extremely clumsy and stupid but I highly highly doubt he was trying to injure anyone. To attack the man's character when you know absolutely nothing about him is just pathetic.

Like I said, keyboard warrior, so go ahead and have your fun. It says a lot about you.

I agree I think some of the terms used in this thread are unjustified. However that shouldnt distract us from discussing what actually happened.

I would like to ask you what you think Healy was trying to do.

The best I can think of was that he was trying to dive onto the ball. Even ignoring the clash of heads it could easily have lead to a YC given where it happened.

by Slow and Sedate Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:15 pm

lostinwales wrote:
Rory_Gallagher wrote:Piece of filth, scumbag, thug.. what a plonker and a keyboard warrior. Very easy to say such things about people when they aren't there to hear it or defend themselves. What Healy did was extremely clumsy and stupid but I highly highly doubt he was trying to injure anyone. To attack the man's character when you know absolutely nothing about him is just pathetic.

Like I said, keyboard warrior, so go ahead and have your fun. It says a lot about you.

I agree I think some of the terms used in this thread are unjustified. However that shouldnt distract us from discussing what actually happened.

I would like to ask you what you think Healy was trying to do.

The best I can think of was that he was trying to dive onto the ball. Even ignoring the clash of heads it could easily have lead to a YC given where it happened.

Rory I suggest you read what I said rather than object to the word I used...I said WE on here are keyboard warriors and what we think doesn't matter. Personally I think he was lucky not to get a yellow for the dive over the ruck and lucky that he wasn't called before the citing officer. But that's my opinion and the 6Ns committee or whoever decided there is no case to answer and they are the ones that count, not me or anyone else sitting here firing responses on line. He's deemed innocent so lets move on.

by Rory_Gallagher Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:19 pm

Lost - In all honesty I have no idea what he was thinking, it was the closing stages of the game and Ireland needed to try and win back possession. I assume he was trying to dive on the ball as well, but honestly it was sheer stupidity. It could have cost us the game and the Championship. I was surprised he wasn't binned to be honest.

Slow and Sedate - my comments were all a response to Chunky, not to your post, I didn't object to anything you said.

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:21 pm

Rory_Gallagher wrote: To attack the man's character when you know absolutely nothing about him is just pathetic.

I can say that in my opinion Cian Healy deliberately injured Dan Cole who could have broken his leg easily. He was accused of biting an opponent on a Lions Tour. And he gave a flying headbutt to an opponent in his most recent match, in my opinion attempting to take him out of the game. In my opinion rugby would be better off without this thug involved.

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:27 pm

Here is the bite. Looks clear to me. The way the Force 9 reacted suggests it was a clear bite. You don't react like that to nothing

http://www.rugbydump.com/2013/06/3220/lions-prop-cian-healy-cleared-of-biting-scrumhalf-brett-sheehan

What goes around comes around. That match was the last of his tour.

And we've all seen this:

Why wasn't this a red card? Diapo511d6d7f452c182b8baa21e7465ed6fc

Why wasn't this a red card? Diapo511d6d7f452c182b8baa21e7465ed6fc

The guy is a ferral animal. He'll get his come uppance.

by Rory_Gallagher Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:27 pm

And in my opinion these forums would be better without you involved. But really it makes no difference what either of us say, you will probably still post here from time to time (unfortunately) and Healy will still play rugby and hopefully help Ireland to win more trophies. Smile

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:29 pm

Rory_Gallagher wrote:And in my opinion these forums would be better without you involved. But really it makes no difference what either of us say, you will probably still post here from time to time (unfortunately) and Healy will still play rugby and hopefully help Ireland to win more trophies.

The fact you and other Irish posters have little panty twists when I post only re-inforces my point of view.

by Rory_Gallagher Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:31 pm

Okay.

by Chunky Norwich Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:31 pm

Oh and one last punch in a ruck

Why wasn't this a red card? Diapof5ccae0c046c7886a2be7c2265881055

Filth

by Submachine Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:38 pm

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Lost - In all honesty I have no idea what he was thinking, it was the closing stages of the game and Ireland needed to try and win back possession. I assume he was trying to dive on the ball as well, but honestly it was sheer stupidity. It could have cost us the game and the Championship. I was surprised he wasn't binned to be honest.

Slow and Sedate - my comments were all a response to Chunky, not to your post, I didn't object to anything you said.

Really? Even after I used numbers and sentences and everything? I though I explained it all very well.

Seriously can nobody see that picamoles moves back about 18 inches from his starting position? If he had remained there Healy would have latched on to his back and flipped him Judo style. He tried to get out of the way to win the penalty (rightly awarded) but didn't move far back enough to avoid contact.
To suggest Healy has deliberately tried to headbutt him is laughable. Clumsy work from two tired players.

by Slow and Sedate Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:59 pm

Submachine, Picamoles is coming off his knees and is looking to pick up the ball when Healy dives in. This is why he appears to move back. Healy's action was a penalty, whether Picamoles had moved or not as he flew in off his feet and in the position on the pitch should have been a card. Whether Healy intended to butt him, only Healy knows, but he did connect and IMO was lucky not to be carded, mainly for the dive although in hindsight the butt.

by lostinwales Fri Mar 21, 2014 3:08 pm

Submachine wrote:
Rory_Gallagher wrote:Lost - In all honesty I have no idea what he was thinking, it was the closing stages of the game and Ireland needed to try and win back possession. I assume he was trying to dive on the ball as well, but honestly it was sheer stupidity. It could have cost us the game and the Championship. I was surprised he wasn't binned to be honest.

Slow and Sedate - my comments were all a response to Chunky, not to your post, I didn't object to anything you said.

Really? Even after I used numbers and sentences and everything? I though I explained it all very well.

Seriously can nobody see that picamoles moves back about 18 inches from his starting position? If he had remained there Healy would have latched on to his back and flipped him Judo style. He tried to get out of the way to win the penalty (rightly awarded) but didn't move far back enough to avoid contact.
To suggest Healy has deliberately tried to headbutt him is laughable. Clumsy work from two tired players.

I can only assume that you think Healy was intending to land on top of Picamoles so he could then grab him and roll away. Its the only way he could have got his arms anywhere near the frenchman. It was a stupid stupid move and hes a very lucky boy.

by GloriousEmpire Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:38 pm

If referees correctly policed ruck entry and participation (as I've been banging on about for weeks now) this would be impossible.

Players need to (a) be on their feet. (B) bind to a team mate on entry (c) keep their heads above their hips.

Both players should've been penalised long before the offence.

by GloriousEmpire Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:49 pm

I notice the as-ever on to it Steve Walsh spots it immediately and signals advantage. Top man.

by mckay1402 Fri Mar 21, 2014 10:52 pm

Wow that is a shocker. Should definitely have been red for me.

by **Biltong** Sat Mar 22, 2014 4:15 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:
Notch wrote: No arm clear out at the breakdown- maybe 1 or 2 weeks max. It was a physical game, these things happen. Slap on the wrist territory.

No.

It's a flying headbutt to the face.

It's a 10 weeker given his previous for dangerous play.

Agree, can anyone remember gow many weeks Bakkies got for his headbutt on Cowan? Or for clearing Jones out of the ruck with no arms in the Lions test?

It certainly wasn't one or two weeks.

by Guest Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:59 am

Yeah that was a shocker alright, and after seeing a few more of his other indiscretions thanks to Funky Chunky, throw the book at him as he ain't no saint that's for sure. I see biltong's point as well, SA get a bad rep, but what's this guy Healy like eh? The Irish cry about Umaga and Mealamu yet here they have themselves a bit of a unit that goes out to hurt people. And then try to defend him! 10 weeks mate, ciao.

by GloriousEmpire Sat Mar 22, 2014 8:25 am

As I've said I don't think there was anything much different about the player's action. Virtually every ruck in the six nations saw players throwing themselves headlong, unbound with no attempt to stay on their feet.

When that is allowed to happen (as the IRB is either directing, or every referee has decided is acceptable independently) then this outcome is inevitable.

I don't think he sets out to execute a flying head butt, but that is the inevitable outcome.

Referees and IRB just simply HAVE to start applying the laws.

by GunsGerms Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:50 am

Chunky Norwich wrote:Sickening.

Oh god would you stop with the pretend outrage. There is no evidence to suggest it was intentional. Maybe it was who knows. He wasnt carded or cited.

Anyway, perhaps as an England fan you should be looking at Owen farrell's suplex on the Italy player, grabing him by the neck and slamming his head into the ground. Very dangerous and unlike Healy unquestionably intentional.

Why dont you focus your pretend outrage on that or any of the other Owen Farrell incidents in this years six nations? If you are going to go around labelling players scumbags look no further than your own team.

by GunsGerms Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:54 am

ebop wrote:Yeah that was a shocker alright, and after seeing a few more of his other indiscretions thanks to Funky Chunky, throw the book at him as he ain't no saint that's for sure. I see biltong's point as well, SA get a bad rep, but what's this guy Healy like eh? The Irish cry about Umaga and Mealamu yet here they have themselves a bit of a unit that goes out to hurt people. And then try to defend him! 10 weeks mate, ciao.

He has received two yellow cards and one ban in 46 international caps. What a badie. Half the England team have a similar or worse diciplinary record yet because his ban came for an incident against England the English never shut up about it.

by jbeadlesbigrighthand Mon Mar 24, 2014 10:29 am

I don't see what this kind of OP adds to the forum. If you feel that strongly about an issue, make your case. The name calling and borderline xenophobia is just ridiculous though, and seems aimed at provoking an argument rather than a debate.

That said, it should have been at least a yellow, and realistically should have been a red. Healy's intentions, whether to clear out Picamoles or injure him, are irrelevant. Picamoles' movements, even if they caused Healy to miss his attempted clear-out and hit Picamoles in the head, are irrelevant. What's relevant is that Healy's actions were illegal (as GE has pointed out) and seriously reckless at best.

by GunsGerms Mon Mar 24, 2014 10:32 am

jbeadlesbigrighthand wrote:I don't see what this kind of OP adds to the forum. If you feel that strongly about an issue, make your case. The name calling and borderline xenophobia is just ridiculous though, and seems aimed at provoking an argument rather than a debate.

That said, it should have been at least a yellow, and realistically should have been a red. Healy's intentions, whether to clear out Picamoles or injure him, are irrelevant. Picamoles' movements, even if they caused Healy to miss his attempted clear-out and hit Picamoles in the head, are irrelevant. What's relevant is that Healy's actions were illegal (as GE has pointed out) and seriously reckless at best.

His intentions are relevant. If it was unintentional then surely calling him a scumbag is uncalled for? Probably uncalled for anyway.

by jbeadlesbigrighthand Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:11 am

GunsGerms wrote:
jbeadlesbigrighthand wrote:I don't see what this kind of OP adds to the forum. If you feel that strongly about an issue, make your case. The name calling and borderline xenophobia is just ridiculous though, and seems aimed at provoking an argument rather than a debate.

That said, it should have been at least a yellow, and realistically should have been a red. Healy's intentions, whether to clear out Picamoles or injure him, are irrelevant. Picamoles' movements, even if they caused Healy to miss his attempted clear-out and hit Picamoles in the head, are irrelevant. What's relevant is that Healy's actions were illegal (as GE has pointed out) and seriously reckless at best.

His intentions are relevant. If it was unintentional then surely calling him a scumbag is uncalled for? Probably uncalled for anyway.

Okay, to put it another way - The action was sufficiently dangerous that his intentions are fairly irrelevant as to whether he should have been carded.

I'm not going to get into a debate of whether or not Healy is a 'scumbag' because I think that's a discussion for the pub. If you're asking me whether I think Healy intended to hurt Picamoles, then no I don't. That said, Healy has in the past lost his cool in high-pressure situations. That's true of other players too, of course (e.g. Farrell gets niggly, Hartley gives away needless penalties), but is made more obvious by the fact that Healy's a physical player and a hugely powerful guy.

by GunsGerms Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:20 am

I love the way people say Healy has lost his cool in the past as if he is some sort of untamable beast who intentionally mames players whenever he takes to the field. He stamped on Cole who was illegaly slowing down the ball in the ruck. This is the only incident in 45 test matches he has been banned for. The reality is his diciplinary record is fairly exemplarly for a prop forward.

by jbeadlesbigrighthand Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:55 am

GunsGerms wrote:I love the way people say Healy has lost his cool in the past as if he is some sort of untamable beast who intentionally mames players whenever he takes to the field. He stamped on Cole who was illegaly slowing down the ball in the ruck. This is the only incident in 45 test matches he has been banned for. The reality is his diciplinary record is fairly exemplarly for a prop forward.

You asked me a question, I answered. But you've put words into my mouth with that summary of my view and you're arguing against a point I'm not making. I don't equate players 'losing their cool' with an intent to harm their opposition (I specifically said the opposite of this incident): It can be more an issue of inaccuracy. I also think it's possible for players to lose their cool in ways that won't always get them bans - hence my examples of Hartley and Farrell. I made my view of the 'scumbag' comment quite clear in my initial post.

Do you think Healy should have been carded for the clear-out? If so, yellow or red?

by GunsGerms Mon Mar 24, 2014 1:21 pm

Kevin Mealamu got a two game ban for headbutting Lewis Moody while clearing out a ruck. Mealamu said it was unintentional but got a two game ban anyway. Maybe based on this precedent something similar would be appropriate. I dont think there is any harm citing a player if the comissioner believes they have a case to answer. We will never know what Healy's response would have been.

However, there is also precedent for not citing. With regards intention there are ample examples of players not being cited because they were challenging for the ball but clashed with someone in the process. McCaw kneeing Parra in the head and knocking him out in the world cup final, Paul O'Connell kicking David Kearney in the head in a Leinster v Munster derby game.

Watching the footage of the incident I dont see any way it can be determined if Healy was trying to contest for the ball or intentionally injure someone so I think it is hard to know what sanction if any is appropriate. The fact that Picamoles was hurt doesnt prove intent.

For me it is clear though if you grab someone around the neck and hurl them head first onto the ground off the ball you deserve to be sanctioned as there is no legitimate reason for doing this so it cant be anything but dangerous play.

by lostinwales Mon Mar 24, 2014 2:59 pm

GunsGerms wrote:I love the way people say Healy has lost his cool in the past as if he is some sort of untamable beast who intentionally mames players whenever he takes to the field. He stamped on Cole who was illegaly slowing down the ball in the ruck. This is the only incident in 45 test matches he has been banned for. The reality is his diciplinary record is fairly exemplarly for a prop forward.

Well he did lose his cool in that match. Watch it again. He was right on and over the edge of what was acceptable for an extended period and could have easily got into more trouble than he did.

Do try and understand this isnt an attack on him as a person or as a rugby player. He is fantastic. A 'force of nature' and a player who would walk into any team in the world. But nobody is perfect *. He is also prone to acts of stupidity and losing his cool.

As for the Picamoles incident and your comment as to what his intentions were and if they are relevant. Well I'd like to know that too, as diving headfirst over a ruck on your goal line has to lead to some serious questions.

*except for Brown obviously...

by GunsGerms Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:14 pm

lostinwales wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:I love the way people say Healy has lost his cool in the past as if he is some sort of untamable beast who intentionally mames players whenever he takes to the field. He stamped on Cole who was illegaly slowing down the ball in the ruck. This is the only incident in 45 test matches he has been banned for. The reality is his diciplinary record is fairly exemplarly for a prop forward.

Well he did lose his cool in that match. Watch it again. He was right on and over the edge of what was acceptable for an extended period and could have easily got into more trouble than he did.

Do try and understand this isnt an attack on him as a person or as a rugby player. He is fantastic. A 'force of nature' and a player who would walk into any team in the world. But nobody is perfect *. He is also prone to acts of stupidity and losing his cool.

As for the Picamoles incident and your comment as to what his intentions were and if they are relevant. Well I'd like to know that too, as diving headfirst over a ruck on your goal line has to lead to some serious questions.

*except for Brown obviously...

In what match? The England game? Yes he got a fair ban for a stamp.

How is he prone to acts of stupidity and losing his cool? His diciplinary record suggests you are talking nonssnse. In 45 games he has one yellow card and one short ban.

by Sponsored content