Lions 2013 Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

fitz · 02-07-2013 07:13AM

Genuinely can't fathom how anyone can think that's a positive result for the game.
Btw, as pointed out, Farrell should be banned too.

Sounds to me like the appeal didn't consider recklessness at all, which is ridiculous.
Even more inconsistency.

The IRB need to sort this stuff out.

The Aussie · 02-07-2013 07:17AM

Magi11 wrote: »

Of course it was intentional. Horwill is a serial stamper. The problem with the initial hearing and the appeal is that they were on a strictly legal basis with no input for the nuances of rugby. If Horwill isn't looking directly at Jones' head (or eye socket) then there is a doubt on his intention. So you have to look at his history and it isn't good. Hope he gets 99'd.

That's what I love about forums, claims of being a serial stamper but this is the first time he has been Cited....

"A stamping charge hangs on intent. Horwill - who has played 130 professional games without ever being cited - says he had no idea Wyn Jones was under him when knocked off balance with a leg raised."

Read more: http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/wallabies/international-rugby-board-under-fire-after-appealing-its-own-decision-not-to-ban-james-horwill/story-e6frf55l-1226671755579#ixzz2XrlAa0uB

So because you want it to be intentional that make it so then.
The IRB might want your number for the next time the have a Hatchet Job that suits your agenda

The Aussie · 02-07-2013 07:20AM

fitz wrote: »

The IRB need to sort this stuff out.

Agreed, the IRB need clear guidelines for the Appeal Process with total transparency, not make it up as they go along every time they buckle to outside pressure.

Magi11 · 02-07-2013 07:31AM

The Aussie wrote: »

That's what I love about forums, claims of being a serial stamper but this is the first time he has been Cited....

"A stamping charge hangs on intent. Horwill - who has played 130 professional games without ever being cited - says he had no idea Wyn Jones was under him when knocked off balance with a leg raised."

Read more: http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/wallabies/international-rugby-board-under-fire-after-appealing-its-own-decision-not-to-ban-james-horwill/story-e6frf55l-1226671755579#ixzz2XrlAa0uB

So because you want it to be intentional that make it so then.
The IRB might want your number for the next time the have a Hatchet Job that suits your agenda

Never cited doesn't mean he isn't a serial stamper!

"Did Hampton know that Horwill has a lot of recent prior in this area? Just six weeks ago Horwill was given a post-match yellow card for stamping on Pek Cowan in the Reds' match against the Force. Two weeks earlier photos showed Horwill stamping on the face of Dan Palmer in the match against the Brumbies."

Swiwi. · 02-07-2013 07:35AM

Magi11 wrote: »

Never cited doesn't mean he isn't a serial stamper!

"Did Hampton know that Horwill has a lot of recent prior in this area? Just six weeks ago Horwill was given a post-match yellow card for stamping on Pek Cowan in the Reds' match against the Force. Two weeks earlier photos showed Horwill stamping on the face of Dan Palmer in the match against the Brumbies."

Please Magi11, spare us the vitriol. Write a letter to Bakkies Botha or Danny Grewcock or Dylan Hartley or someone else with a genuine disciplinary problem. Sour grapes seem to be the order of the day. Horwill went through due process - twice - and has been exonerated. Time to move on...

fitz · 02-07-2013 07:40AM

The Aussie wrote: »

Agreed, the IRB need clear guidelines for the Appeal Process with total transparency, not make it up as they go along every time they buckle to outside pressure.

No.
The problem here is with the initial judgement, not the fact that there was an appeal.
It's very narrow.
Can't prove the stamp was intentional (practically impossible to prove, even if it was the case, which I don't think it was), so he's completely innocent.
But, really, he's not.
His recklessness doesn't seem to have been judged at all.
This is tantamount to saying that he doesn't have a duty of care to his fellow players, which is rubbish.

This was a whitewash, and the IRB rightly appealed.
The appeal seems to have assessed whether the thought process of the original judgement was ok, but again, seems to have restricted it's scope to proof of intentional stamping.

There was nothing wrong with the original assessment of whether the stamp was intentionally aimed at AWJ's head. But to say that Horwill did nothing wrong is look-the-other-way idiocy imo.

They need new guidelines alright, but not for the appeals process...for the judiciary to consistently assess and punish this kind of recklessness before we have more Ian McKinley type incidents.

As long as people get away with this crap, it'll keep happening.
If Farrell and Horwill had both been banned straight off for their recklessness, it would have sent a very visible message in such a high profile test series.
We need consistent, appropriate action to be taken when players are reckless with the safety of others on the pitch.

Magi11 · 02-07-2013 07:40AM

Le vieux renard wrote: »

Time to move on, methinks...

What's your views for the game this weekend Magi11 for example?

I hope that if the Lions are going to go down they at least go down swinging. This "have what you hold" mentality was understandable when they were 1-0 up but they will lose if they try that again. I would see areas for hope. A Northern hemisphere ref is a help, Roberts being back would be a huge lift and if not Manu is bound to come in for Davies. Obviously if Corbisiero is fit he starts. This game could be lost off the pitch as Gatland's tactics of kicking the ball away have been found wanting and are anathema to the Welsh team this side is built upon.

.ak · 02-07-2013 07:41AM

Disappointing that the word intent was used in defence...

The Aussie · 02-07-2013 07:44AM

Magi11 wrote: »

Never cited doesn't mean he isn't a serial stamper!

"Did Hampton know that Horwill has a lot of recent prior in this area? Just six weeks ago Horwill was given a post-match yellow card for stamping on Pek Cowan in the Reds' match against the Force. Two weeks earlier photos showed Horwill stamping on the face of Dan Palmer in the match against the Brumbies."

Yes we can all go search Planet Rugby for other users posts... :rolleyes:

Not a Horwill fan of Perth says… June 23, 2013 at 5:10 PM
Unfortunately Horwill has history of this sort of thuggery - a post match yellow card for stomping on Pek Cowan in the Force v Reds and a similar incident in the Reds v Brumbies - as Wallabies captain he should be setting a better example. He did very little in the game and seems to be one of the weakest captains we have had for some time. If only Sharpie was still playing...

Read more: http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/wallabies/wallabies-captain-james-horwill-cited-for-allegedly-stamping-on-british-irish-lions-alun-wyn-jones/story-e6frf55l-1226668210270#ixzz2XrrxdRwQ

Have you ever been in a Ruck by chance. (This is a actual question BTW)

Anyway, I've said enough on this topic, bring on the weekend.

fitz · 02-07-2013 07:46AM

.ak wrote: »

Disappointing that the word intent was used in defence...

Exactly.
Intent is only relevant if you're trying to prove what he did was deliberate.
Proving intent is practically impossible in these kind of incidents.
Whether he needlessly and recklessly endangered the safety of another player is not, and is worthy of appropriate punishment.

fitz · 02-07-2013 07:47AM

The Aussie wrote: »

Have you ever been in a Ruck by chance. (This is a actual question BTW)

Horwill was not rucking.
This wasn't a case of someone lying on the wrong side getting a bit of a shoeing to prompt a speedy retreat.
He should never have been using the boot in those circumstances.

Mahatma Geansai · 02-07-2013 08:26AM

I guess it's just another example of the citing process during a Lions tour being exposed as farcical. Disappointing that all this whole affair will do is give Australia a boost going into the last test.

Podge_irl · 02-07-2013 08:26AM

Le vieux renard wrote: »

I am about to have breakfast and HUMBLE PIE is on the menu. As well as those cotton socks. I can't believe he was cleared. Hopefully that's the last we'll see of frivolous appeals. An apology to aspertions cast on the original QC by the IRB wouldn't go amiss. Roll on Saturday, where both teams can field their strongest side available!

Surely the IRB appealing the decision and having the appeal turned down (by the independent judiciary

) is a perfect example of how these things should happen. It shows the process is independent, but the IRB (or someone at any rate) on the opposite side of the table from the players needs to be able to appeal these things. Allowing only the players right of appeal would be incredibly one-sided and would assume any errors in judgement were solely to the detriment of the player, not the process.

Podge_irl · 02-07-2013 08:29AM

I don't particularly think him being cleared is justice either. He deserved a ban.

subfreq · 02-07-2013 08:39AM

I have been quite embarrassed by the 'Justice for Horwill' campaign, reminded me of the 'Justice for Bakkies' one.

All this has done is highlight major blind spots/inconsistencies in the IRB and most worryingly the possibility that they don't even know their own rules well enough and misjudged the appeal.

The result wont change this weekends game unless Horwill is going to defend in the 12 channel and somehow man mark both Doc and Manu for 80 minutes.

Lelantos · 02-07-2013 08:45AM

Lewis Moody on sky claimed that the IRB were looking into the procedure the citing officer used to arrive at his decision & that they didn't have the power to overrule the decision. That's something I hadn't heard before.

Magi11 · 02-07-2013 08:47AM

Having presided over the worst Lions tour in a generation, I would have thought Clive Woodward would have kept his nose out of how the Lions relaxed in the last few days

sydthebeat · 02-07-2013 08:50AM

CowboyTed wrote: »

Wait until the do or die moment in the test... If they have the back line on the field, BOD will take control... Sexton will follow BOD...

Heineken cup final 2011 anyone??

Buer · 02-07-2013 08:57AM

I am unapologetic in my disappointment with the decision. People repeatedly cited a precedent being set with the appeal. Well, I'd like to say a precedent has now been set in terms of the defence that was claimed. If someone injures another, all they have to do is claim that it was not deliberate and be able to show that there's a strong possibility they didn't specifically see the individual they injured.

There was a very, very similar incident involving Ryan Kankowski who was unbalanced in a ruck and threw the foot down. He received a 2 week ban which was downgraded to 1 in light of mitigation (he had been carded in the game). That's what I would have expected for this.

I'll give my last word to Stephen Larkham: "I've seen the incident, it's pretty bad, it's pretty obvious and I definitely don't think it was accidental."

02-07-2013 09:23AM

Crazy decision really. And embarrassing stuff for the IRB.

The idea that intent or lack of can be used to completely mitigate reckless play is nuts!

The duty of care to other players is no longer a requisite to play the game?

This is the second time this season (and with reference to this tour too!) that this has been shown.

Rightwing · 02-07-2013 09:27AM

Good. Horwill cleared.

Maybe a bit like the POC decision, but whatever the citing chap says, as far as I'm concerned, that's it, done and dusted.

bilston · 02-07-2013 09:35AM

subfreq wrote: »

The result wont change this weekends game unless Horwill is going to defend in the 12 channel and somehow man mark both Doc and Manu for 80 minutes.

I see what you did there;)

Leslie91 · 02-07-2013 09:45AM

Don't agree that he got off in the first place but it's been a circus since. At least now it should be over, draw a line. Then 15 lads in red please step over that line and beat the living crap out of those Aussies, Horwill included.

Dave_The_Sheep · 02-07-2013 09:51AM

I thought he should have gotten a ban in the first place, but I also thought that this IRB appeal thing was a bad idea, made it a bit of a farce. Of course, it's a farce anyways, with the inconsistency, but still. Once the citing is done and judgement passed, that should be it. This just opens the door to all citing decisions being questioned now.

They need to fix the inconsistency across the various regions/comps when it comes to citing, but IRB appeals aren't the way to go in my view.

Anyways, on to Saturday, even if I also think the Lions have blown their chance.

andrewdcs · 02-07-2013 09:57AM

Thinking about the game plan and use of substitutions on Saturday.... Gatland has no hope whatsoever of becoming All Blacks coach. Win or lose on Saturday, non-Rugby (which is his game) won't cut it where he wants to go.

Ok, Youngs and Vunipola had nightmares, Australia played for their jerseys and the captain went off with 13 left.... The management team brough nothing with them in the tank for any eventuality.

Scottish fans must have been sick / given up bothering watching Grant on the bench, and knowing they have at leat 2 locks (neither actually on tour!) who could have steadied the scrum / pack in Oconnells absence.

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience · 02-07-2013 10:01AM

Disgraceful decision, bad for the game and lowers the IRB in my estimation.

Rightwing · 02-07-2013 10:06AM

andrewdcs wrote: »

Thinking about the game plan and use of substitutions on Saturday.... Gatland has no hope whatsoever of becoming All Blacks coach. Win or lose on Saturday, non-Rugby (which is his game) won't cut it where he wants to go.

Ok, Youngs and Vunipola had nightmares, Australia played for their jerseys and the captain went off with 13 left.... The management team brough nothing with them in the tank for any eventuality.

Scottish fans must have been sick / given up bothering watching Grant on the bench, and knowing they have at leat 2 locks (neither actually on tour!) who could have steadied the scrum / pack in Oconnells absence.

This tour has cost Gatland, it's little more than a shambles. I was a big fan of his, both from Wasps and Wales.

A question I'm asking:

Are the NH players just nowhere near as good as we think? (Kidney/Gatland/Johnson etc) seems to be a lot of poor managers about....maybe they are just poor managers, Schmidt will def be the test, if he fails, I'm blaming the players.

accidentprone1 · 02-07-2013 10:09AM

I think it is the right decision to uphold the original ruling.

I think the original ruling was incorrect.

That's my contribooshun.

.ak · 02-07-2013 10:17AM

Rightwing wrote: »

This tour has cost Gatland, it's little more than a shambles. I was a big fan of his, both from Wasps and Wales.

A question I'm asking:

Are the NH players just nowhere near as good as we think? (Kidney/Gatland/Johnson etc) seems to be a lot of poor managers about....maybe they are just poor managers, Schmidt will def be the test, if he fails, I'm blaming the players.

The players aren't as good as SH players. There's elements of genetics, rugby background and all sorts that put NZ, Oz and SA players head and shoulders above the rest of the world.

However, in recent years I firmly believe that gap has lessoned. The pro game is only around a wet week when you think about it and the game is pushing players to be bigger, stronger, fitter.

I think the players are good. But at the end of the day, a game of rugby is rarely decided by how good the players are compared to the other 15. That's far too simplistic. It's down to game plan, coaching, mentality, home or away advantage etc., etc.

1 to 22 the Oz players were better than Ireland's in the WC. But we beat them because we brought the right game plan with us, and probably an element of wanting it more than they did.

At the moment, the Lions game plan just isn't working. Simple as. The players are more than capable of the performances they put in last Saturday or even the Saturday before that.

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience · 02-07-2013 10:21AM

.ak wrote: »

The players aren't as good as SH players. There's elements of genetics, rugby background and all sorts that put NZ, Oz and SA players head and shoulders above the rest of the world.

However, in recent years I firmly believe that gap has lessoned. The pro game is only around a wet week when you think about it and the game is pushing players to be bigger, stronger, fitter.

I think the players are good. But at the end of the day, a game of rugby is rarely decided by how good the players are compared to the other 15. That's far too simplistic. It's down to game plan, coaching, mentality, home or away advantage etc., etc.

1 to 22 the Oz players were better than Ireland's in the WC. But we beat them because we brought the right game plan with us, and probably an element of wanting it more than they did.

At the moment, the Lions game plan just isn't working. Simple as. The players are more than capable of the performances they put in last Saturday or even the Saturday before that.

Lions players certainly aren't the problem. It's Gatland and his coaching team

I said it before the tour began that I didn't think we'd be expansive enough to win and it seems to be coming to pass

If Schmidt was involved in this tour I could see a balance being struck and the Lions winning, as of now it's very much up in the air

Lions 2013 Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

Comments