Cheika's comments on Clancy

I see Cheika is in trouble over comments about George Clancy. Are people too precious about comments made after the game?

Stag, the problem is that emotions are inevitably running high just after a match. It's the reason why they interview players and coaches so soon after a game - you're more likely to get a decent soundbite - but people should be understanding if a coach or player says something they might regret.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:Stag, the problem is that emotions are inevitably running high just after a match. It's the reason why they interview players and coaches so soon after a game - you're more likely to get a decent soundbite - but people should be understanding if a coach or player says something they might regret.

Thats what I think too. IMO Cheika didn't say anything that bad.

red_stag wrote:

Hows everyone this morning. I see Cheika is in trouble over comments about George Clancy. Are people too precious about comments made after the game?

100% YES! it does my head in that the referees have some sort of immunity from criticism. If a referee has a shocker, why not call him up about it?? Football is the worst for it Alex Ferguson this season got done once for bad mouthing a ref and then once for complementing the ref. It's dericulas

hughie1986 wrote:

red_stag wrote:

Hows everyone this morning. I see Cheika is in trouble over comments about George Clancy. Are people too precious about comments made after the game?

100% YES! it does my head in that the referees have some sort of immunity from criticism. If a referee has a shocker, why not call him up about it?? Football is the worst for it Alex Ferguson this season got done once for bad mouthing a ref and then once for complementing the ref. It's dericulas

I would also say that although I know there are complaint channels, should these be more transparent?

STAG - what he say, what he say ? Link ?

He said "'Once again we came undone due to the shortcomings of, you know. I don't think I should say it because I will only get in trouble."

Link is http://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/2011/0613/cheikam.html

red_stag wrote:He said "'Once again we came undone due to the shortcomings of, you know. I don't think I should say it because I will only get in trouble."

That quote in itself isn't particularly offensive. But he's in trouble for more than that, isn't he? According to the IT he "is alleged to have made comments of an insulting/offensive/disparaging/intimidatory nature to match officials during the half-time break, and that he did the same to an ERC staff member after the full-time whistle."

Now if his comments (admittedly in the heat of the moment) have accused Clancy of bias or being corrupt, then yes, he should be hauled over the coals. No ref goes into a game with the intention of being seen that way.

I'd rather wait and see what the full story is.

Grey, are you happy for that to be conducted behind closed doors or done in public.

I had a case of fairly severe referee abuse this season actually. Hard to know if I'd liked it to be handled differently.

red_stag wrote:Grey, are you happy for that to be conducted behind closed doors or done in public.

Do you mean the investigation? I don't think we need every sordid detail, but the ERC always publish disciplinary hearings and I don't see why any investigation into Cheikas actions wouldn't be similarly published. If he's found not-guilty I'm sure he'd want that public, and if he's found guilty the ERC would probably want to make sure his case acts as a deterrent.

I'm against trial by media, though, and I'm glad to see he's being investigated now rather than straight after the final when tempers and emotions are still running high.

greybeard wrote:

red_stag wrote:Grey, are you happy for that to be conducted behind closed doors or done in public.

Do you mean the investigation? I don't think we need every sordid detail, but the ERC always publish disciplinary hearings and I don't see why any investigation into Cheikas actions wouldn't be similarly published. If he's found not-guilty I'm sure he'd want that public, and if he's found guilty the ERC would probably want to make sure his case acts as a deterrent.

I'm against trial by media, though, and I'm glad to see he's being investigated now rather than straight after the final when tempers and emotions are still running high.

All good sound points Rugby is pretty good overall for it but there are some incidents that need nipping in the bud.

Nothing is ever nipped in the bud, unfortunately. Three cheers for Sireli Bobo and all that...


Off-topic, but I'd like to see ERC taking over all disciplinary hearings in the major European leagues. Last year the ML moved to independent panels, which is good, but the RFU and FFR still ajudicate on matters within their domestic competitions. The ML teams, in an effort to do the right thing, put themselves at a disadvantage.

greybeard wrote:Nothing is ever nipped in the bud, unfortunately. Three cheers for Sireli Bobo and all that...


Off-topic, but I'd like to see ERC taking over all disciplinary hearings in the major European leagues. Last year the ML moved to independent panels, which is good, but the RFU and FFR still ajudicate on matters within their domestic competitions. The ML teams, in an effort to do the right thing, put themselves at a disadvantage.

I know its a real pity and makes a mockery of the disciplinary hearings. Along with scrums and national qualification I think discipline is one of the issues that need addressing in rugby at the minute.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:Stag, the problem is that emotions are inevitably running high just after a match. It's the reason why they interview players and coaches so soon after a game - you're more likely to get a decent soundbite - but people should be understanding if a coach or player says something they might regret.

It wasnt what he said after, its what he said during the game too. Ultimatly coaches like players are expected to maintain some level of professionalism no matter how high emotions ran.

And FFS is the Amlin losers cup, I know victories were few and far between for his side but its strikes that hes the only person in Europe who actually gave a toss.

I haven't heard the comments he made about Clancy, but thinking back to the game. I turned to Stade fans beside me when that last scrum was given and I told them that Clancy was never going to award them a penalty even though there were dominating at the scrum at the time. Stade seemed to moved Quins back a foot and Quins buckled under the pressure, it was a clear penalty. Clancy, with the body language that suggested to me that he did not want a penalty decision he was giving on the last phase of play to determine the game (and I did think his body language was that clear as he was very nervous as soon as the scrum was given at the end of the game) roars at the Stade scrum half to play the ball, play the ball. How any ref can shout play the ball to a scrum half when both front rows are pretending to be flightless birds is beyond me.

It is a serious development issue for Clancy. He is in line to have some crucial RWC (isn't he?) and if he is visibly shirking his responsibility to call what he sees in front of him, how is the guy going to have the testicular fortitude to back himself to make the big calls at the next level.

Clancy's performance has been remarked on before, and was picked up by the
commentator on the night. It shouldn't matter whether anyone cares about the outcome of a match, to that particular coach the result mattered,because it meant his team would be in the HC next year. It happened with Scarlets v Ulster where the ref had refereed only 7 games previously and Nigel Davies and captain Matthew Rees were absolutely fuming. I know everyone makes mistakes but when you are at the business end of the season you shouldn't be at the mercy of an inexperienced ref.