Cian Healy cited for biting

uRbaN

Its far from ideal...immedaitely on Twitter people were posting footage of him stamping on Dan Coles leg in the 6N. George Hook also made a stupid comment implying Healy was already found to be guilty.

There is no room in the game for this at all...but I really hope nothing comes of this tomorrow and we can move on . A lot of the home nations push their own agenda around the Lions...its a chance for former players & current pundits to make a few quid....I hate the buildup matches...they become a feeding frenzy of idle speculation.

Tobyglen

Dub13 wrote: »

First I am not a mod here. Yes I know he has only been cited and maybe this is not the correct place to bring this up but bitting has happened before in rugby and it does not seem to get the same press as the Suarez incident.

Now I know the level of intelligence needed to become a moderator. I think I'll pass.

mod note: banned.

Chucky the tree

The contrasting attitudes to Healys biting Sheahan compared to Hartley on Best is comical.

Buer

errlloyd wrote: »

Sheehan admitted at half time it may have been accidental!! Can't have been that hard if he was willing to admit that.

I'd say Sheehan just got too close to Healy's mouth.

Admitted it could be accidental and then made a statement at full time to the citing commissioner...

NoelJ

Dub13 wrote: »

Point take that my point may be early, I just seen this on the main page and noticed a distinct lack of the media wanting to run with this story.

I think the main difference is Rugby fans expect the citing committee to make the correct call how Football the FA usually only make the call based upon media coverage.

The actual physical element of rugby also means that incidents like this aren't made into such a big deal and then the popularity of football means everything

19543261

Chucky the tree wrote: »

The contrasting attitudes to Healys biting Sheahan compared to Hartley on Best is comical.

...

Wow. Seriously?

EmacB

Video of the incident: http://www.3news.co.nz/VIDEO-Lions-Healy-in-bite-controversy/tabid/317/articleID/300417/Default.aspx

"I don't know if it was an accident or on purpose," - Sheehan http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/22784626 .

Force coach Michael Foley played down the biting allegation, which clouded the Lions' first game in Australia.

"It's been left on the field," he said.

"It was dealt with by the referee at the time."

http://planetrugby.com/lions/story/0,25883,16024_8758937,00.html

From all the above I'm hopefull that Healy wont be found guilty. I cant see Healy biting in the video but its still inconclusive. It shows Sheehen is the one putting his hand towards Healy's face, so it's not like he leaned over and took a bite. Furthermore Healy's head is pushed down by another Western Force player. From all that it seems If contact was made between Healys teeth and Sheehan's hand it could easily have been totally accidental.

Kayless

I can't see this going anywhere because

A. The player who's claiming to have been bitten publicly stated before the match that he intended to make a nuisance of himself
B. During half time he stated that he never knew if there was any malice (adding further doubt as to the legitimacy of his claim)
C. Healy doesn't have that bad a record, ok he did stamp on Dan Cole but apart from that he's never really been in trouble (you would almost believe Sheehan if he had accused someone like Hartley but Healy is not that type of player)
D. From what I can see (and the TMO for that matter) the video footage is inconclusive, so if they can't prove Healy did bite him I don't see how they could ban him

Also on the positive side I think Healy could do with a rest (that is if he does get sent home with his injury) he's been playing no stop now for the best part of 3 seasons and fair play to him, it's just really unfortunate that he will miss the tests.

CatFromHue

Chucky the tree wrote: »

The contrasting attitudes to Healys biting Sheahan compared to Hartley on Best is comical.

Have you got as clear footage as the Hartley-Best thing for Healy-Sheehan?

Being cited doesn't mean your guilty (are you listening Rob Penny :pac: ).

bamboozle

Watched it several times, nothing in it, if anything Sheehan had been involved in a tangle for no reason a few minutes previously with Murray, he was looking for trouble, Healy was carrying the ball in contact with three players hanging off him...

Any word on his injury?

Aidric

[Deleted User] wrote: »

it would be out of character.

Healy is no angel.

Buer

It all hinges on medical evidence. If there was a bite, there will be a medical report and photos of any bite marks. If there are none, then it's highly dubious that anything happened and there should be no ban.

If there is, throw the book.

It's now 7.20am in Brisbane. We should know the outcome when we wake up.

CatFromHue

There was little to no footage of Hartley's bite on Ferris so who knows what will happen here.

Profiler

Aidric wrote: »

Healy is no angel.

Healy is abrasive but he is not dirty.

Him biting anyone is out of character

Swan Curry

CatFromHue wrote: »

There was little to no footage of Hartley's bite on Ferris so who knows what will happen here.

I'm pretty sure they had footage from other cameras and stills for that incident.There seems to be only one picture of this incident and it shows Healy as being innocent.

durkadurka

Ferris showed the bite mark to the ref.

In the clip I see him putting his hand in Healys mouth. In know what I'd do if someone did that to me.

Buer

CatFromHue wrote: »

There was little to no footage of Hartley's bite on Ferris so who knows what will happen here.

No but in that instance Ferris went to the referee and there were clear bite marks on his finger. Eanna Falvey then had to give medical attention to Ferris on the field. I recall Owens took the captains aside and told them he had identified bite marks on Ferris but did not see the incident.

If there's similar here, then it's a fairly simple case. I'm not sure there is though.

Howjoe1

Profiler wrote: »

Healy is abrasive but he is not dirty.

Him biting anyone is out of character

did he get a ban for stamping in the 6Ns recently?

Chucky the tree

CatFromHue wrote: »

Have you got as clear footage as the Hartley-Best thing for Healy-Sheehan?

Being cited doesn't mean your guilty (are you listening Rob Penny :pac: ).

There wasn't clear footage though. Also Hartley claimed Best stuck his finger in there. People hear are almost saying that if Sheahan did that and Healy bite him then it's not Healys fault.

Howjoe1 wrote: »

did he get a ban for stamping in the 6Ns recently?

That was also out of character.


:pac:

vkid

Buer wrote: »

It all hinges on medical evidence. If there was a bite, there will be a medical report and photos of any bite marks. If there are none, then it's highly dubious that anything happened and there should be no ban.

If there is, throw the book.

It's now 7.20am in Brisbane. We should know the outcome when we wake up.

surely ithey would have checked him medically..ie for bite marks before healy was cited?

Profiler

Howjoe1 wrote: »

did he get a ban for stamping in the 6Ns recently?

Did he get one for biting?

Howjoe1

Profiler wrote: »

Did he get one for biting?

so stamping is not regarded as dirty play?

Tox56

Howjoe1 wrote: »

so stamping is not regarded as dirty play?

Would you regard BOD as a dirty player?

Profiler

Howjoe1 wrote: »

so stamping is not regarded as dirty play?

There is no degree of biting that is tolerated in the game.

If you are lying over the ball, accidentally or purposefully and stopping it coming back then a stamp/shoeing/active encouragement to move is is tolerated.

Big difference between the two types of incidents and you know full well there is.

the baby bull elephant

Healy is a hard player and there was the stamping and he's thrown a fair few punches but nothing as low as biting. In that sense it would be out of character.

razorblunt

Profiler wrote: »

There is no degree of biting that is tolerated in the game.

If you are lying over the ball, accidentally or purposefully and stopping it coming back then a stamp/shoeing/active encouragement to move is is tolerated.

Big difference between the two types of incidents and you know full well there is.

What about biting to counteract fishhooking. If someone is performing free dentistry albeit unrequired then is that tolerated? Happened between Grewcock (I know I know) and Mealamu (I know I know) in 2005.

Profiler

razorblunt wrote: »

What about biting to counteract fishhooking. If someone is performing free dentistry albeit unrequired then is that tolerated? Happened between Grewcock (I know I know) and Mealamu (I know I know) in 2005.

No, biting is not tolerated at all. That's why he got the two month ban.

Moreover retaliation is not permitted either.

vkid

razorblunt wrote: »

What about biting to counteract fishhooking. If someone is performing free dentistry albeit unrequired then is that tolerated? Happened between Grewcock (I know I know) and Mealamu (I know I know) in 2005.

BBCNews just showed a short clip...not of the bite, but showing Sheehan pointing at his forearm....fishooking looks unlikely in that case.

CIARAN_BOYLE

I don't know if Healy was biting or not. I honestly doubt it. To me it looks like the WF SH shoved his arm into Healy's arm and tried to sell it to the ref to get Healy punished. It didn't work on the pitch but given the seriousness of the allegations I think it is right that a citing commision review the incident and look at video from every angle in order to clear Healy.

Buer

vkid wrote: »

BBCNews just showed a short clip...not of the bite, but showing Sheehan pointing at his forearm....fishooking looks unlikely in that case.

In the video though, it didn't look like the forearm was near the mouth at all