Italy Citations, surely!?!

stavros440

Hey people. Naturally enough I'm sure you all saw the game yesterday, what a game, it really shows what Ireland can do. With that sort of playing we could definitely break Wales on Saturday and probably France/England the following week.

Question is though, will the forward that went for an aul gouge on Cian Healy be cited for it? And better yet, though I may have misread what I saw; because I can't really believe it...did Italy's flanker actually pull Healy from a maul and punch him in the face? And if he did, surely to Christ he'll get cited for that? I know it's "in the past" as Healy so rightly put it, and it's not quite sportsmanship to want the opposing players to be cited, but that was some disgusting stuff. They deserve to have the book swung at them!

Fishooks12

stavros440 wrote: »

Hey people. Naturally enough I'm sure you all saw the game yesterday, what a game, it really shows what Ireland can do. With that sort of playing we could definitely break Wales on Saturday and probably France/England the following week.

Question is though, will the forward that went for an aul gouge on Cian Healy be cited for it? And better yet, though I may have misread what I saw; because I can't really believe it...did Italy's flanker actually pull Healy from a maul and punch him in the face? And if he did, surely to Christ he'll get cited for that? I know it's "in the past" as Healy so rightly put it, and it's not quite sportsmanship to want the opposing players to be cited, but that was some disgusting stuff. They deserve to have the book swung at them!

Although italy were cynical at times Bergamasco was pulled from the maul by Healy. He stupidly hit out and didn't connect, that's it, not even a yellow never mind a citing .

I reckon the gouging incident won't go unpunished, apart from that I can't see where there will be another citing

The Orb

No need to cite, the best reaction was to beat them off the pitch, perhaps Healy should go to the airport and wave them off.

Dangerous Man

Ghiraldini should be cited. I'm kind of annoyed by this one given Cian had just got over an eye injury.

stavros440

The Orb wrote: »

No need to cite, the best reaction was to beat them off the pitch, perhaps Healy should go to the airport and wave them off.

LMFAO!

@Fishooks, I could have sworn Bergmasco connected; certainly looked like it. You can see on the replay the ref is too engaged with the scrum to notice; God only knows what the linesmen were doing. Tying their shoes perhaps? Either way, those Italians played some filthy tactics on Healy. Seems like they saw his Aussie performance and said "We'll have you!"

Fishooks12

stavros440 wrote: »

LMFAO!

@Fishooks, I could have sworn Bergmasco connected; certainly looked like it. You can see on the replay the ref is too engaged with the scrum to notice; God only knows what the linesmen were doing. Tying their shoes perhaps? Either way, those Italians played some filthy tactics on Healy. Seems like they saw his Aussie performance and said "We'll have you!"

Ya they targeted Healy for a reaction but he was rock solid. On the subject of the punch, it was handbags at best, happens in every game and Healy did pull him away from the ruck and hang on.

Healy smiling after destroying the Italian scrum si up there with Ferris using Genia as a squeeze toy in my highlights real

uberwolf

Dangerous Man wrote: »

I'm kind of annoyed by this one given Cian had just got over an eye injury.

A little OT, but has any one interpreted any suggestions that Healy suffered a little attention from the English when he got that eye injury?

cython

The Orb wrote: »

No need to cite, the best reaction was to beat them off the pitch, perhaps Healy should go to the airport and wave them off.

If that punt downfield against them was anything to go by maybe his boot should be used to launch their plane like an aircraft carrier catapult :pac:

tolosenc

What about Parisse's off the ball hits on D'arcy? Cynically and systematically trying to take out one of our best players on the day.

Fishooks12

tolosenc wrote: »

What about Parisse's off the ball hits on D'arcy? Cynically and systematically trying to take out one of our best players on the day.

It won't get cited. If it were a dangerous high tackle it could be but it was just a block.

Anyway what does it matter, Italy are out and we're through

LostPassword

Parisse also launched himself knees first into Cronin's ribs at a ruck under our posts near the end which could easily be cited. In general, as the game slipped away from them, the Italians got more and more dirty. There was also a brawl during our last try which wasn't shown on camera but was remarked upon by the commentators.

Having said all that, I'd be entirely happy if there were no citings as there's always the chance that one of our lot hit somebody and getting knocked out of the competition is enough of a punishment for the Italians and we could really do without losing anybody for the knock-outs.

DM360

I personally would like to see at least one citing - Ghiraldini. He cannot be let off as a matter of principle. I can't understand people saying their exit from RWC is punishment enough for Italy.

Eye-gouging is filthy and possibly one of the most underhand, disgusting tactics someone could employ during a rugby match. It's highly dangerous and should be punished to the maximum extent every time, regardless of circumstances. If people start to get away with it, the situation will only get worse.

It seems to be the same international teams getting players banned for eye-gouging when representing their country:

- Italy: Parisse, Mauro Bergamasco and now, hopefully, Ghiraldini
-South Africa: Burger, Bismarck Du Plessis and Bakkies Botha

I'd hope this one qualifies for a mid-range ban, 24 weeks at least. Would teach Ghiraldini and the Italian team a good lesson. While I have nothing else against him, in fact I think he's a great player, one of Italy's finest, this moment of madness/frustration/anger, I don't know what caused it but it must face consequences

muletide

Castrogiovanni tweeted last night more or less telling Healy to be a man and not to cite (or site as he said)

Fishooks12

DM360 wrote: »

I personally would like to see at least one citing - Ghiraldini. He cannot be let off as a matter of principle. I can't understand people saying their exit from RWC is punishment enough for Italy.

Eye-gouging is filthy and possibly one of the most underhand, disgusting tactics someone could employ during a rugby match. It's highly dangerous and should be punished to the maximum extent every time, regardless of circumstances. If people start to get away with it, the situation will only get worse.

It seems to be the same international teams getting players banned for eye-gouging when representing their country:

- Italy: Parisse, Mauro Bergamasco and now, hopefully, Ghiraldini
-South Africa: Burger, Bismarck Du Plessis and Bakkies Botha

I'd hope this one qualifies for a mid-range ban, 24 weeks at least. Would teach Ghiraldini and the Italian team a good lesson. While I have nothing else against him, in fact I think he's a great player, one of Italy's finest, this moment of madness/frustration/anger, I don't know what caused it but it must face consequences

That's over the top. In terms of gouging incidents it's on the lower end of the scale, he'll get a maximum of 12 weeks

Teferi

muletide wrote: »

Castrogiovanni tweeted last night more or less telling Healy to be a man and not to cite (or site as he said)

Whats his twitter there? Can't find it.

outwest

Teferi wrote: »

Whats his twitter there? Can't find it.

leavingonajetplane:D:D:D:rolleyes:

Eoin

Dangerous Man wrote: »

Ghiraldini should be cited. I'm kind of annoyed by this one given Cian had just got over an eye injury.

Absolutely. Eye gouging is one of the scummiest things you can do on a pitch.

Given that Italy's tournament is over, you could understand if a punch or whatever wasn't cited. But eye gouging really needs to be punished severely so it's considered a complete taboo.

Here it is again - at about 0:50. I can't see how some people are saying it's inconclusive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tq8XkUEyr8

DM360

Fishooks12 wrote: »

That's over the top. In terms of gouging incidents it's on the lower end of the scale, he'll get a maximum of 12 weeks

18 weeks would be fair, 12 isn't long enough. In the RWC, rugby union's biggest event, Ghiraldini has been caught in the act by multiple camera angles clearly eye-gouging a player out of the blue.

Jennings got 12 weeks for his on Kennedy where the evidence was minimal with a shocking camera angle and clear cut fingers in eyes, just a hand near and face. While I don't claim Jennings was innocent, lower scale bans should be left for unsure cases, where malice and intent to injure aren't 100%.

Here we see Ghiraldini's fingers in a claw shape, groping Healy's eye-socket. The only way I can see him get less is if they bring that whole "no previous offence" BS into the case.

jk86

Teferi wrote: »

Whats his twitter there? Can't find it.

http://twitter.com/#!/castrito81/status/120664362309517312

Rougies

AUCKLAND, 4 Oct. - Leonardo Ghiraldini (ITA) will have a disciplinary hearing on Tuesday, 4 October following a citing by Peter Larter (ENG) for a breach of Law 10.4(m) contact with the eyes or the eye area and acts contrary to good sportsmanship on Ireland No.1 (Cian Healy) during the Rugby World Cup 2011 Pool C match against Ireland on 2 October.
The case will be heard by the Independent Judicial Officer Bruce Squire QC (NZL).
The hearing will take place in Auckland at 16:00.

www.rugbyworldcup.com/home/teams/team=36/news/newsid=2057136.html

GerM

I assume this meant that Ghirlandini was asked to stay behind to attend a potential hearing whilst his colleagues returned home?

Whilst I can genuinely see a case for Ghirlandini's actions being reckless more than pre-meditated, I would have been pleased to see Parisse cited for his cheap shot. Hitting a player off the ball unexpectedly like he did to D'Arcy can be very dangerous and he deserves to be taken to task over it.

bamboozle

suprised Parise got away with doing something pretty similar to the thug Armitage, Armitage could have argued he was committed to the tackle, Darcy didnt even have the ball when blindsided by Parise.

castie

15 weeks http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/home/news/newsid=2057297.html#leonardo+ghiraldini+banned+weeks

Seems they halved what they were going to give him.
Be a silly boy if he tries to appeal that.

ted1

Looking at in I am not convinced it was gouging, looks like he may. Have been trying to get a bind.

castie

ted1 wrote: »

Looking at in I am not convinced it was gouging, looks like he may. Have been trying to get a bind.

I thought that at the beginning but you see him flick his fingers rather than grabbing.

Kayless

Italy hooker Leonardo Ghiraldini has been banned for 15 weeks after he admitted making contact with Irish prop Cian Healy's eyes during their rugby World Cup Pool C clash in Dunedin on Sunday.





The 26-year-old, who maintained his actions were not deliberate, faced a hearing in Auckland over the incident.
Judicial officer Bruce Squire of New Zealand said after he had reviewed all the evidence that he felt the contact had been deliberate and the offending was "at the top end".
Healy was penalised for retaliating after the incident in their 36-6 victory at Stadium Otago on Sunday, though television replays then showed Ghiraldini had touched Healy's eyes as the pair wrestled at the breakdown.
A general guildeline for dealing with eye incidents suggests a ban of 24 weeks but Squire reduced the suspension to 15 because of the hooker's previously unblemished record, said World Cup organisers.
The Treviso front rower, who has 48 hours to appeal against the sanction, can resume playing again on 18 January 2012.
The defeat by Ireland meant Italy were knocked out of the tournament.
Reuters

who what when

Damn right too...

milltown

Interesting cultural differences in attitudes to this.
While I'm often inclined to think that "eye gouging" is a bit of a sensationalist catch-all phrase for it, I'm in full agreement that it's probably the lowest, most despicable thing one sportsman can do to another on a rugby pitch. I was amazed on Sunday though, reading some of the NZ and Oz news sites, where they light heartedly referred to Healy "getting a facial".
One extreme to the other IMO.

Eoin

Here's a still from the video above.

GerM

Eoin wrote: »

Here's a still from the video above.

Still images are wholly misleading in gouging cases and should be avoided. Any fingers brushing across an eye area can be construed as gouging going by them. A still image wouldn't differentiate at all between this, Burger's effort and Attoub's rummaging in Ferris' eye socket.

Ghirlandini deserved a ban. I don't think he intentionally gouged anyone. If he did, he'd be looking at a far lengthier suspension. He was trying to grab a hold of Healy and his actions were reckless. I expected about 12 weeks going on the standard ban.

Eoin

GerM wrote: »

Still images are wholly misleading in gouging cases and should be avoided. Any fingers brushing across an eye area can be construed as gouging going by them. A still image wouldn't differentiate at all between this, Burger's effort and Attoub's rummaging in Ferris' eye socket.

I see your point, but I don't think that image it's taken out of context from the video that I posted. I honestly can't see how it looks unintentional.

sydthebeat

appropriate ban.... using quinlans as a reference.

Not going to affect him any though.
Leaves him back available against ireland on 5th feb 2012.

corny

I'm not sure whether it was intentional or not, i don't think its conclusive but i think you have to consider he had a 'previously unblemished record'. If it was out of character I'd be willing to give him the benefit of doubt and leave it at it was reckless but unintentional. 15 weeks is about right.

GerM

If anyone thought he was intentionally trying to gouge another player he would be looking at a lot longer than 15 weeks. Ghirlandini made a grab, couldn't see Healy's face and released fairly instantly when it was his eye area. Even in slow motion it lasts only one second. Reckless though and a 15 week ban will make sure he's a lot more careful in future. If it was an actual gouge Healy would have known all about it.

Eoin

I'm not saying it was a bad gouge - maybe it was just to provoke Healy, but I do think it was intentional. And it was seen as a deliberate act by the IRB.

irishbucsfan

sydthebeat wrote: »

appropriate ban.... using quinlans as a reference.

Not going to affect him any though.
Leaves him back available against ireland on 5th feb 2012.

He'll be missing 4 Heineken Cup games, so it will affect him.

JustinDee

sydthebeat wrote: »

Not going to affect him any though.
Leaves him back available against ireland on 5th feb 2012.

Having played next-to-no club rugby.
He'll be lucky to make the squad, let alone the team.

irishbucsfan

GerM wrote: »

If anyone thought he was intentionally trying to gouge another player he would be looking at a lot longer than 15 weeks. Ghirlandini made a grab, couldn't see Healy's face and released fairly instantly when it was his eye area. Even in slow motion it lasts only one second. Reckless though and a 15 week ban will make sure he's a lot more careful in future. If it was an actual gouge Healy would have known all about it.

It was deliberate though. He admitted it was, hence it being placed in the 24-week bracket.

If it wasn't deliberate he would've been looking at a ban like Jennings or Quinlan's, not a 24-week ban reduced due to previous record. He intentionally grabbed Healy's face and deserves every second of this ban.

walshb

Proper order; and seen as deliberate too. How some could defend it and make out he didn't know what he was doing. That irritated me.

GerM

Fair enough, got that wrong, misread the report. I would still contest those making a gouging accusation though. It's contact with the eye area. Gouging is something that is a lot more disturbing and this wasn't that.

walshb

GerM wrote: »

Fair enough, got that wrong, misread the report. I would still contest those making a gouging accusation though. It's contact with the eye area. Gouging is something that is a lot more disturbing and this wasn't that.

Maybe they saw it as him trying to gouge. Does he have to succeed in order for the ban?

sydthebeat

JustinDee wrote: »

Having played next-to-no club rugby.
He'll be lucky to make the squad, let alone the team.

i agree, but he'll still be available.

fair point on the heineken cup matches, he might loose his treviso captaincy as well.

Eoin

walshb wrote: »

Maybe they saw it as him trying to gouge. Does he have to succeed in order for the ban?

This is how they worded it:

under Law 10.4(m) acts contrary to good sportsmanship; in this case, for contact with the eye or the eye area of an Irish player

walshb

Eoin wrote: »

This is how they worded it:

So, my post and the one I responed to are mute I guess.

Cotact with eye area.

Is there a ban for gouging, or attempted gouging?

Eoin

Actually, it looks like even the bit I quoted isn't specifically mentioned in the laws. It's just covered by 10.4(m)

Acts contrary to good sportsmanship. A player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship in the playing enclosure.

JustinDee

GerM wrote: »

Fair enough, got that wrong, misread the report. I would still contest those making a gouging accusation though. It's contact with the eye area. Gouging is something that is a lot more disturbing and this wasn't that.

There is no such offence as 'gouging'.
'Contact with the eye area' is the basic charge to which there are degrees applied grounded upon intent and for want of a better word, execution.

Eoin

JustinDee wrote: »

There is no such offence as 'gouging'.
'Contact with the eye area' is the basic charge to which there are degrees applied grounded upon intent and for want of a better word, execution.

Are these charges listed anywhere, given that the relevant law seems to be a bit of a catch-all?

GerM

JustinDee wrote: »

There is no such offence as 'gouging'.
'Contact with the eye area' is the basic charge to which there are degrees applied grounded upon intent and for want of a better word, execution.

I'm aware. My point was in reference to those who on the forum and are accusing him of gouging. All gouging is contact with the eye area, not all contact with the eye area is gouging.

twinytwo

the whole citing/ban process is a complete and laughable joke... how in the name of god does ghiraldini get a 15 week ban for what he did, but buger only gets 8 weeks for what was a must worse "contact" on fitz???

GerM

twinytwo wrote: »

the whole citing/ban process is a complete and laughable joke... how in the name of god does ghiraldini get a 15 week ban for what he did, but buger only gets 8 weeks for what was a must worse "contact" on fitz???

I think it was that incident and the outcry surrounding it that has seen a far tougher stance being taken on gouging in the last couple of years. I view that as a watershed case for IRB sanctions. If he did it today, I think he'd get 26 weeks.

Dangerous Man

I think the citing commissioner got this spot on.