One rule for England and different for everyone else

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Ben Morga » Mon, 02 Mar 1998 04:00:00


Now I know certain people out there are going to say this smacks of sour
grapes and it may well be tinged with it a touch but....

Why the hell is it that England seem to be able to get away with
everything? I mean, Phil Vickery punches someone, gets cited and under
the rules (which I incidentally don't agree with) gets a thirty day ban
which is recinded on appeal for no particular reason? What became of
Jason Leonard's stamping on Lievremont in the France game? Nothing. The
England management were asked by France to discipline Leonard as they
are uncomfortable with the citing process (or something like that).
Nothing further gets heard of it. Nor did it when Leonard broke Mike
Hall's ribs in Europe for Quims this season. Cardiff asked Quins to
discipline the player and again nothing happened. Now while I'm quite
happy to see Leonard playing for England because, lets face it he's been
rubbish for a while now, I'm noticing a pattern here. Tony Rees gets a
90 day ban for what can at worst be described as accidental, at best
innocuous. Dale McIntosh gets 30 days for being beaten up and Andy Moore
gets a one game ban. The Andy Moore ban would surely have been longer
except for Vickery getting off scot free. I know England don't have any
other props, I mean going into the next game with a front row of
Garfoth,***erill and Ubogu would be more frightening to most England
fans than Scottish ones, but how does this possibly excuse their
actions? Vickery's ban should stand as it's in the rules. At least for
this season anyway, hopefully they'll get rid of the daft citing thing
next season but I'm sorry I don't see how you can punch, get caught, be
suspended and then be let off again just because you're English.

--
Ben Morgan

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Ben Cle » Tue, 03 Mar 1998 04:00:00


<<stuff deleted>>

Quote:
>Now I know certain people out there are going to say this smacks of sour
>grapes and it may well be tinged with it a touch but....

>Why the hell is it that England seem to be able to get away with
>everything? I mean, Phil Vickery punches someone, gets cited and under
>the rules (which I incidentally don't agree with) gets a thirty day ban
>which is recinded on appeal for no particular reason?

What's really bad about this appeal decision is that the logic was that if
the referee had seen it, less severe action might have been taken therefore
the lesser penalty is always deserved. Does this mean that if players after
commiting foul play can find referees who will say they wouldn't have sent
them off for an offence then they too can get off without punishment?

How about saying we want to put an end to players punching each other and
have the referee take control of the game -- surely the point should be
that if Vickery hadn't punched anyone he wouldn't have gotten suspended,
not that if he'd done it and got caught he *might* not have been punished.

The revision needs to go the other way, players who are seen but not sent
off by the referee should still be required to be accountable for their
actions if on reflection the referee might have erred too much on the side
of leniency.

Quote:
>What became of
>Jason Leonard's stamping on Lievremont in the France game? Nothing. The
>England management were asked by France to discipline Leonard as they
>are uncomfortable with the citing process (or something like that).
>Nothing further gets heard of it.

Involving the coaches in the whole process is idiotic anyway. Even if
France missed the deadline, it would have been easy enough to ask some
independent third party to assess the incident.

         Cheers,

                     Ben

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

University of Oregon            | http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~benc
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by John Willia » Tue, 03 Mar 1998 04:00:00



Quote:
>Why the hell is it that England seem to be able to get away with
>everything? I mean, Phil Vickery punches someone, gets cited and under
>the rules (which I incidentally don't agree with) gets a thirty day ban
>which is recinded on appeal for no particular reason?

I take it you looked at the incident on video? Did you really think the
offence deserved a 30 day ban? If so, then Humphrey's petulant display when he
hit Dawson after he touched down probably deserved the same. Tell you what,
why don't you keep a camera on every player every game, and see how long it
takes to ban a complete XV?

The Five Nations committee removed the punishment on Vickery as it was
considered unnecessarily harsh. Referee Hawke said if he had seen the offence
he would have done nothing more than give a yellow card and penalty, at most.
Therefore the automatic ban for a sending off offence was inappropriate. If
you disagree with that logic, fair enough. You can't say no reason was given
though.

Quote:
>What became of
>Jason Leonard's stamping on Lievremont in the France game? Nothing.

Did you ever bother to look up the "stamping" on the video of the game? If you
did you would understand why no ban was given. There was no case to answer in
my view. Presumably in the view of the English management also.

The reason given for no citing from the French officials was that they hadn't
spotted the offence within the necessary time limit (24hrs?). Presumably they
hadn't thought the matter sufficiently important to interrupt their post game
celebrations.

Incidently, there were cases Leonard should have had to answer last season,
notably incidents with Wainwright v Scotland and someone or other v Wales
(twice). I'm surprised you didn't drag those out of the closet. Then there's
Leonard's barge on Joubert back in '94 which allowed Andrew to score that try
in the first test......

Quote:
>The
>England management were asked by France to discipline Leonard as they
>are uncomfortable with the citing process (or something like that).
>Nothing further gets heard of it.

That's it then. Definitely a cover up. Call in Inspector "Knacker of the Yard"
Knacker immediately.

[...]

Quote:
> ....  I'm noticing a pattern here. Tony Rees gets a
>90 day ban for what can at worst be described as accidental, at best
>innocuous. Dale McIntosh gets 30 days for being beaten up and Andy Moore
>gets a one game ban. The Andy Moore ban would surely have been longer
>except for Vickery getting off scot free. I know England don't have any
>other props, I mean going into the next game with a front row of
>Garfoth,***erill and Ubogu would be more frightening to most England
>fans than Scottish ones, but how does this possibly excuse their
>actions? Vickery's ban should stand as it's in the rules.

An appeal is allowed within the rules too, or are only some rules to be
allowed?

Quote:
>At least for
>this season anyway, hopefully they'll get rid of the daft citing thing
>next season but I'm sorry I don't see how you can punch, get caught, be
>suspended and then be let off again just because you're English.

Neither would I. But, then, I haven't seen it quite that way. Neither do the
5N committee, which is more to the point.

I certainly agree there are definite problems with the citing system, which
hopefully will be addressed.

Woodward has said the English management's  view on citing is that it would
only be used for what the management consider potential sending off offences.
I can't remember what Rees did. I know McIntosh was sent off, so got the
appropriate ban. Moore was possibly fortunate to get a one game suspension,
but that's the way things go. The England A v Wales A game following which
Moore was suspended was slightly dodgy on the discipline front, and under a
different referee there may well have been more cards given out. If Moore had
been sent off, he would have been stuck will a mandatory 30 day ban, as I
understand it.

Lack of consistency from referees is always going to lead to anomalies in
punishments for foul play, and it's hard to see matters ever changing.

All the best

John Williams.

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by John Willia » Tue, 03 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Quote:



><<stuff deleted>>
>>Why the hell is it that England seem to be able to get away with
>>everything? I mean, Phil Vickery punches someone, gets cited and under
>>the rules (which I incidentally don't agree with) gets a thirty day ban
>>which is recinded on appeal for no particular reason?
>What's really bad about this appeal decision is that the logic was that if
>the referee had seen it, less severe action might have been taken therefore
>the lesser penalty is always deserved. Does this mean that if players after
>commiting foul play can find referees who will say they wouldn't have sent
>them off for an offence then they too can get off without punishment?

No Ben, it doesn't mean that. Hawke, the referee officiating in the match,
said he wouldn't have sent off Vickery if he'd seen it. Less severe action
WOULD have been taken, it wasn't a question of just a committee's opinion.

It is a fact that referees are generally unwilling to dismiss players, but
that isn't relevant in this case.

Quote:
>How about saying we want to put an end to players punching each other and
>have the referee take control of the game -- surely the point should be
>that if Vickery hadn't punched anyone he wouldn't have gotten suspended,
>not that if he'd done it and got caught he *might* not have been punished.
>The revision needs to go the other way, players who are seen but not sent
>off by the referee should still be required to be accountable for their
>actions if on reflection the referee might have erred too much on the side
>of leniency.

Accountable to whom? The match referee? An independent committee? Ben Morgan
:-) ? The system is unsatisfactory, but I don't see how bringing in an extra
layer of officialdom is going to make the system more sensible.

In the case in question, Hawke has made his opinion known.

In general, I feel the referee should be a prime mover in how citing and post
match disciplinary actions are handled. Failing that, an independent official
appointed before the game and attending the game in person.

Quote:
>>What became of
>>Jason Leonard's stamping on Lievremont in the France game? Nothing. The
>>England management were asked by France to discipline Leonard as they
>>are uncomfortable with the citing process (or something like that).
>>Nothing further gets heard of it.
>Involving the coaches in the whole process is idiotic anyway. Even if
>France missed the deadline, it would have been easy enough to ask some
>independent third party to assess the incident.

The 5N committee presumably had jurisdiction over the incident, and could have
considered the matter. Maybe they did consider it?

One possible outcome of this round of citing is, hopefully, a full appraisal
of a system which is bringing the game into disrepute.

All the best

John Williams.

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Kingsley Matthew » Tue, 03 Mar 1998 04:00:00



Quote:
>Now I know certain people out there are going to say this smacks of sour
>grapes and it may well be tinged with it a touch but....

Not sour grapes Ben, but it has been going on for a long timeber
Rodber's bit of thuggery in South Africa, and he played in the next
game, but then the English would have us believe they are the only ones
who play fair.
--
Kingsley Matthews
 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Richard Menin » Wed, 04 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Quote:

> Now I know certain people out there are going to say this smacks of sour
> grapes and it may well be tinged with it a touch but....

> Why the hell is it that England seem to be able to get away with
> everything? I mean, Phil Vickery punches someone, gets cited and under
> the rules (which I incidentally don't agree with) gets a thirty day ban
> which is recinded on appeal for no particular reason? What became of
> Jason Leonard's stamping on Lievremont in the France game? Nothing. The
> England management were asked by France to discipline Leonard as they
> are uncomfortable with the citing process (or something like that).
> Nothing further gets heard of it. Nor did it when Leonard broke Mike
> Hall's ribs in Europe for Quims this season. Cardiff asked Quins to
> discipline the player and again nothing happened. Now while I'm quite
> happy to see Leonard playing for England because, lets face it he's been

You're right Ben
I just want to mention another incident
which was not really mention in the british press but
was a big thing in the french papers:
The incredible aggression of Greg Chalmers on D. Aucagne during
the Murrayfield encounter:
Aucagne is lying on the ground and chalmers dive on him with
his knees: one on the ribs the other one on the neck:
Aucagne finishes the game but had to stay one night in hospital for
concussion: he is out for three weeks.
The french staff cited Chalmers within the 24 hours limit this time:
after video (the incident
was clearly visible on TV)
consultation and some blablabla, Chalmers was cleared!!!

In France the same incident results in 12 weeks suspension.
Yes I assure you, mind you we have improve our discipline
in the last six years or so!!

Richard

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Brian Bus » Wed, 04 Mar 1998 04:00:00


says...

Quote:
>game, but then the English would have us believe they are the only ones
>who play fair.
>--
>Kingsley Matthews

Yes, that's what really annoys me.  English fans relish seeing there players
dish it out, but set *** mobs when the opposition commit a marginal late
tackle.

Brian

--
remove 'bye' from address to reply

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Ben Morga » Thu, 05 Mar 1998 04:00:00



Quote:


>I take it you looked at the incident on video? Did you really think the
>offence deserved a 30 day ban? If so, then Humphrey's petulant display when he
>hit Dawson after he touched down probably deserved the same. Tell you what,
>why don't you keep a camera on every player every game, and see how long it
>takes to ban a complete XV?

And while we're at it lets take a look at what upset John Humphreys in
the first place then, being stamped in the face? Missed that did you?
You also seem to have missed my point John. FACT: Vickery threw a punch.
FACT: regardless of damage inflicted or whatever, under citation rules
(which are crap) Vickery has to receive the minimum ban as if he were
sent off ie. 30 days. FACT: Vickery's ban was lifted in blatant
contradiction to the rules. Why?

Quote:
>The Five Nations committee removed the punishment on Vickery as it was
>considered unnecessarily harsh. Referee Hawke said if he had seen the offence
>he would have done nothing more than give a yellow card and penalty, at most.
>Therefore the automatic ban for a sending off offence was inappropriate. If
>you disagree with that logic, fair enough. You can't say no reason was given
>though.

No LEGAL reason within the rules was given now was it? There is nothing
in the rules to let a player off if someone considers the ban "harsh"
even if he does wear white.

Quote:
>>What became of
>>Jason Leonard's stamping on Lievremont in the France game? Nothing.

>Did you ever bother to look up the "stamping" on the video of the game? If you
>did you would understand why no ban was given. There was no case to answer in
>my view. Presumably in the view of the English management also.

As far as I know they didn't even bother watching it. There was
certainly no announcement about it, just nicely brushed under the carpet
like the Hall kneeing incident which Leonard also got away with.

Quote:
>Incidently, there were cases Leonard should have had to answer last season,
>notably incidents with Wainwright v Scotland and someone or other v Wales
>(twice). I'm surprised you didn't drag those out of the closet. Then there's
>Leonard's barge on Joubert back in '94 which allowed Andrew to score that try
>in the first test......

My point exactly if Leonard were Welsh or Scottish or god forbid, a
South African, he'd have so many bans by now he'd be spending more time
on his arse than on a rugby field. But he's English and he's got away
scott free just like Dooley and Brian Moore before him and Ben Clarke as
well.

Quote:
>An appeal is allowed within the rules too, or are only some rules to be
>allowed?

An appeal was taken for Rees and Dale MacIntosh, both fell on the deaf
ears of Roger Pickering.

Always remember these famous words. "Just because they wear White,
doesn't mean they're angels." Shame more refs never listened to them.

--
Ben Morgan

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Ben Morga » Thu, 05 Mar 1998 04:00:00


writes

Quote:

>> Now I know certain people out there are going to say this smacks of sour
>> grapes and it may well be tinged with it a touch but....

>> Why the hell is it that England seem to be able to get away with
>> everything? I mean, Phil Vickery punches someone, gets cited and under
>> the rules (which I incidentally don't agree with) gets a thirty day ban
>> which is recinded on appeal for no particular reason? What became of
>> Jason Leonard's stamping on Lievremont in the France game? Nothing. The
>> England management were asked by France to discipline Leonard as they
>> are uncomfortable with the citing process (or something like that).
>> Nothing further gets heard of it. Nor did it when Leonard broke Mike
>> Hall's ribs in Europe for Quims this season. Cardiff asked Quins to
>> discipline the player and again nothing happened. Now while I'm quite
>> happy to see Leonard playing for England because, lets face it he's been

>You're right Ben
>I just want to mention another incident
>which was not really mention in the british press but
>was a big thing in the french papers:
>The incredible aggression of Greg Chalmers on D. Aucagne during
>the Murrayfield encounter:
>Aucagne is lying on the ground and chalmers dive on him with
>his knees: one on the ribs the other one on the neck:
>Aucagne finishes the game but had to stay one night in hospital for
>concussion: he is out for three weeks.
>The french staff cited Chalmers within the 24 hours limit this time:
>after video (the incident
>was clearly visible on TV)
>consultation and some blablabla, Chalmers was cleared!!!

>In France the same incident results in 12 weeks suspension.
>Yes I assure you, mind you we have improve our discipline
>in the last six years or so!!

Tell that to Brive and Pau! I didn't see much of the Scotland game so I
can't really comment on it. We're Scotland playing in white? Maybe
that's the connection.

--
Ben Morgan

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Richard Menin » Fri, 06 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Quote:


> writes

> >> Now I know certain people out there are going to say this smacks of sour
> >> grapes and it may well be tinged with it a touch but....

> >> Why the hell is it that England seem to be able to get away with
> >> everything? I mean, Phil Vickery punches someone, gets cited and under
> >> the rules (which I incidentally don't agree with) gets a thirty day ban
> >> which is recinded on appeal for no particular reason? What became of
> >> Jason Leonard's stamping on Lievremont in the France game? Nothing. The
> >> England management were asked by France to discipline Leonard as they
> >> are uncomfortable with the citing process (or something like that).
> >> Nothing further gets heard of it. Nor did it when Leonard broke Mike
> >> Hall's ribs in Europe for Quims this season. Cardiff asked Quins to
> >> discipline the player and again nothing happened. Now while I'm quite
> >> happy to see Leonard playing for England because, lets face it he's been

> >You're right Ben
> >I just want to mention another incident
> >which was not really mention in the british press but
> >was a big thing in the french papers:
> >The incredible aggression of Greg Chalmers on D. Aucagne during
> >the Murrayfield encounter:
> >Aucagne is lying on the ground and chalmers dive on him with
> >his knees: one on the ribs the other one on the neck:
> >Aucagne finishes the game but had to stay one night in hospital for
> >concussion: he is out for three weeks.
> >The french staff cited Chalmers within the 24 hours limit this time:
> >after video (the incident
> >was clearly visible on TV)
> >consultation and some blablabla, Chalmers was cleared!!!

> >In France the same incident results in 12 weeks suspension.
> >Yes I assure you, mind you we have improve our discipline
> >in the last six years or so!!

> Tell that to Brive and Pau! I didn't see much of the Scotland game so I
> can't really comment on it. We're Scotland playing in white? Maybe
> that's the connection.

> --
> Ben Morgan

Well
it is a never ending story foul play!!!
Check I said that France has improve but obviously
it is not perfect the best example
is stupid mad Torrossian of Pau, who fractured
the jaw of Leflammand last year (a punch).
Where I totally disagree with you is about Brive
Who for me has a really good discipline and thanks
has won the EU title last year.
This year they were under a lot pressure after
agressions by Pontipryd! I mean in the famous bar!
because I myself can not comment on this game at Brive
I did not watch it. Pontipridd were in bLack?
I told you a never ending story

Richard

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by John Morg » Fri, 06 Mar 1998 04:00:00



[snip]

Quote:
>Where I totally disagree with you is about Brive
>Who for me has a really good discipline and thanks
>has won the EU title last year.
>This year they were under a lot pressure after
>agressions by Pontipryd! I mean in the famous bar!
>because I myself can not comment on this game at Brive
>I did not watch it. Pontipridd were in bLack?

Pontypridd were indeed in black. I did see the game and it was my
opinion that Ponty reacted to *** and intimidation with, er, more
*** and intimidation. Both sides were culpable and both were
punished for it - hopefully both sides will have learned from their
mistakes in the future.

As for the trouble in the bar, it seems to be taking a hell of a long
time for the authorities to decide what they are going to do. Do the
wheels of justice always grind so slowly in France?

--
John Morgan
To email remove the double e's

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Neal1 » Fri, 06 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Ben Morgan wrote

Quote:
>And while we're at it lets take a look at what upset John Humphreys in
>the first place then, being stamped in the face? Missed that did you?

So that excuses his attempt to maim Dawson then.  If I were you , I would worry
about where your next victory is coming from, Ben. Italy are not in the
Championship yet.

Neal

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Ben Morga » Sat, 07 Mar 1998 04:00:00



Quote:
>Ben Morgan wrote
>>And while we're at it lets take a look at what upset John Humphreys in
>>the first place then, being stamped in the face? Missed that did you?

>So that excuses his attempt to maim Dawson then.  If I were you , I would worry
>about where your next victory is coming from, Ben. Italy are not in the
>Championship yet.

Well neal you seem to be reading words into my post that I didn't
actually write. Where do you see the bit saying "I'll excuse Humphreys
because he was stamped on"? It's not there is it? Funny that because I
don't excuse Humphreys for it. The previous poster (can't even remember
who it was) went off topic by bringing up Humphrey's little *** on
Healey. We were discussing the Vickery incident and other cases where
Englishmen had got off scot free despite action being taken against
them. As he brought up one incident I thought I'd add another from the
same game. England are a dirty team but they get away with it because
everyone is under the illusion that they're not.
And as far as the championship goes, Italy may not be in but Ireland and
Scotland are, Colin Hawke isn't the ref in either so we may (possibly)
get a fair game.

--
Ben Morgan

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Neal1 » Sat, 07 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Ben, I have followed your post for quite a while, sometimes with disbelief. I
have come to the conclusion that there will never be a fair game in your eyes.
Even Nigel is not as bad as you.

Neal

Quote:
>Ben Morgan wrote
>Colin Hawke isn't the ref in either so we may (possibly)
>get a fair game.

 
 
 

One rule for England and different for everyone else

Post by Terry Fitzpatri » Sun, 08 Mar 1998 04:00:00


Quote:

>Ben, I have followed your post for quite a while, sometimes with disbelief. I
>have come to the conclusion that there will never be a fair game in your eyes.
>Even Nigel is not as bad as you.

You are being grossly unfair, Neal. Grossly unfair to thousands of
Welsh fans out there who are every bit as bad as Mr Morgan. He comes
from the well practised school of Welsh supporters who never
acknowledge that anyone plays better than Wales, just that they scored
more points than them on the day.

Regards

Terry