Healy Cited

First topic message reminder :

Cian Healy has been cited, do people think he'll get a couple of weeks off?

http://www.planetrugby.com/news/healy-cited-for-knee-strike/

Don Alfonso wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

eirebilly wrote:

Am no, I would not have appealed the ban either. I just believe in discipline which is why I said if I was the club, I would make him sit out a couple of matches on top of any ban as its the only way certain players will learn.

You do not cover yourself in much glory sometimes Chunky, even when people are actually agreeing with you, you have to have a dig.

It's not a dig. I appreciate what your saying, but if you look at how the Irish conduct themselves in disciplinary hearings to try and twist everything to their advantage and escape a player ban, then you can probably take a guess as to whether they'd have a self imposed ban or not. There's more chance of finding rocking horse sh1t.

Paul Emerick came in as a medical joker after Andrew Trimble was injured, was given a yellow for a dangerous, dirty tackle and, despite being short on players, Brian McLaughlin wouldn't play him again.

That's more of a coaching issue isn't it, because he was a liability. Not as a moral high ground decision.

Not really. Brian McLaughlin coached me at school, and he would be enraged by the sort of stuff. Disgusted by dirty play.

So no. I would imagine it was a moral reason. Also, Emerick playing was less of a liability than some of the rejigging they had to do in the backline.

Are there any examples of self-imposed disciplinary bans from other teams? Have any of the region's done that?

Leicester have a good track record of disciplining their own players. Although whether that's because it looks good in he forthcoming hearing I'm not sure.

No idea about the regions.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Your link doesn't work.

http://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/test/worldrugby/document/2015/10/14/de9e79fb-d1cf-4d8c-aaf4-184f54bedac3/151014_JO_Decision_Sean_O'Brien_(Ireland).pdf

It's an argument over semantics, and whether or not wholley should be interpreted as very or, I guess, completely. The defence did provide precedent, which the citing panel correctly chose to ignore.

It's what you would expect from any defence, Chunky. Nothing murky about it.

Your reply shocks me

Chunky Norwich wrote:Your reply shocks me

Yes, but you are a bit of a drama queen

Looking at the video I cant help remembering being on the receiving end of a fat prop doing exactly that in a schoolboy game. Just for a change I played like an idiot for the rest of the game. At the very least it was reckless by Healy.