Scotland v Wales |
Post Reply | Page <1 14151617> |
Author | |||
dr_martinov
Veteran Joined: 06 August 2005 Location: Tycoch Status: Offline Points: 13286 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Disciplinary record of each? Liam got a three week ban as well for the same offence. I guess that is some level of consistency comparing the three at least, although O'Mahony's got form (I suppose Liam has as well).
|
|||
Sponsored Links | |||
reesytheexile
Veteran Joined: 11 August 2012 Location: Machynys Status: Offline Points: 17530 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I don’t think these hearings have changed in years and the point about daring to disagree with a referee decision on appeal eg as to red card or not seems ridiculously archane . It should be a fresh analysis with no disrespect to the match day referee.
|
|||
dr_martinov
Veteran Joined: 06 August 2005 Location: Tycoch Status: Offline Points: 13286 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
In our legal system don't people who accept their guilt (or what they are being prosecuted for at least) get a lighter sentence though?
|
|||
Legendinmybathroom
Veteran Joined: 29 May 2017 Location: Burry Port Status: Offline Points: 3151 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
The only reason he got 4 weeks and O’Mahony got 3 is because Faguson is Scottish and O’Mahony is Irish.
The Irish and English players seem to get off lightly compared to players from other northern hemisphere countries, just look at the way officials look at/ or don’t look at nearly everything that Farrell does on the field of play on a weekly basis.
|
|||
Mogwen
Veteran Joined: 07 April 2013 Location: Yma o Hyd Status: Offline Points: 4489 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I normally would agree. But fagerson was too "twp" to plead his guilt. Even if he didnt mean it, it would have reduced his sentence. Youve got to tell the panel what they want to hear.
"Im sorry" "Im guilty" "I wont do it again" "Thsnk you sir for being so lenient" |
|||
The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.
|
|||
dr_martinov
Veteran Joined: 06 August 2005 Location: Tycoch Status: Offline Points: 13286 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Or take one out of the Government's book: "I'm sorry that you feel it deserved a red."
|
|||
roy munster
Veteran Joined: 30 August 2010 Status: Offline Points: 15682 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
These committees are an awfuly sensitive lot arent they? how are they selected?
|
|||
ROYMOND MUNTER MBE (FOR SERVICES TO THE COMBOVER)
|
|||
RR1972
Veteran Joined: 27 April 2009 Status: Online Points: 18268 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
a rare moral stance by a player, he stuck by his guns and got an extra game ban
Not sure if he is to be commended or condemned for that course of action
|
|||
aber-fan
Veteran Joined: 25 October 2004 Location: Wales Status: Offline Points: 18857 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Very silly - Fagerson's foul was nowhere near as cynical as O'Mahoney's, but both were very clearly red cards both under the law, and under any application of common sense and duty of care towards other players. If he was advised to make this plea (that it wasn't a red card offence) by his coaches, he was given dreadful and stupid advice.
|
|||
“You cannot reason a man out of what he never reasoned himself into.” (Jonathan Swift)
|
|||
aber-fan
Veteran Joined: 25 October 2004 Location: Wales Status: Offline Points: 18857 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Condemned, surely? He is showing a total lack of understanding of the laws.
|
|||
“You cannot reason a man out of what he never reasoned himself into.” (Jonathan Swift)
|
|||
GPR - Rochester
Veteran Joined: 01 December 2014 Location: Rhydcymerau Status: Offline Points: 18783 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Whether Fagerson accepted that the red was correct should not really be relevant in the decision on extent of ban. The ref issued a red and I guess the panel agreed - Fagerson's thoughts really don't matter a jot. Whilst both his and O'Mahony's incidents have some similarities they are also very different - Francis against Ireland was not in need of clearing out he was out of the game & he was deliberately targeted by O'Mahony. Wyn was a danger to Scotland and Fagerson was correct in trying to clear him out but got his technique wrong. O'Mahony should have been banned for 6 weeks & Fagerson for 2/3.
|
|||
aber-fan
Veteran Joined: 25 October 2004 Location: Wales Status: Offline Points: 18857 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I entirely agree that O'Mahoney should have got longer, for a dirty, cynical foul. 6 weeks. (Plus his 'previous' should have looked a lot worse than it did. Miraculous how 'clean' his record is... apparently.) I don't agree that Fagerson should have got less than 3 weeks, as 6 weeks was the punishment for a mid-level offence of that nature, and he got it halved for (as far as I know) a genuinely decent record. However, the panel rightly considers whether the miscreant accepts that he did wrong. Fagerson's clear out was completely against the laws, as the ref made clear in his discussions with the assistants, which from memory went something like this: "he came from a distance... he had a clear line of sight... he entered the ruck out of control...he made contact with the head..." That's a red card all day long - only possible 'mitigation' was Wyn's head movement, but it was slight and he would have hit Wyn in the head regardless - as the ref correctly pointed out. Fagerson got lucky that Wyn was not KO or worse. If Fagerson and his advisers at the SRU are too thick to read the law book - tough. |
|||
“You cannot reason a man out of what he never reasoned himself into.” (Jonathan Swift)
|
|||
Why
Veteran Joined: 22 August 2010 Status: Offline Points: 8738 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
||
I agree with the final analysis but Fagerson should have admitted he deserved red card he be looking at 3 weeks at most. Bad advice been given undoubtedly.
|
|||
She asks why i still can't answer. I guess its in the blood.
|
|||
GPR - Rochester
Veteran Joined: 01 December 2014 Location: Rhydcymerau Status: Offline Points: 18783 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Don't disagree with anything there Aber but whether a player shows remorse shouldn't enter into it. Lets be honest O'Mahony isn't really sorry for what he did but gets a reduced sentence because he said sorry - thats a nonsense. The panel have the players previous record, they have endless angles of he current incident & the ref's report. Frankly what the player or his lawyer says or doesn't say should be of no interest whatsover. My argument stems from the fact that the panel saw both incidents as the same which they clearly weren't. I am in no way suggesting that Fagerson's wasn't a red card but it certainly wasn't a clear cheap shot like O'Mahony's.
|
|||
aber-fan
Veteran Joined: 25 October 2004 Location: Wales Status: Offline Points: 18857 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
As I said - O'Mahoney deserved 6 weeks at least, with no reduction - we agree on that. As for Fagerson - the system is what it is. If he or the coaches are too thick to understand the laws - because it WAS a red card offence - and go into the disciplinary saying - "sorry - but I didn't deserve it", then - tough - as I said before. 6 weeks or more O'Mahoney; 4 weeks Fagerson - would fit the crimes better.
|
|||
“You cannot reason a man out of what he never reasoned himself into.” (Jonathan Swift)
|
|||
roy munster
Veteran Joined: 30 August 2010 Status: Offline Points: 15682 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
how do we know exacly what fagerson said then? perhaps his reply was more nuanced
|
|||
ROYMOND MUNTER MBE (FOR SERVICES TO THE COMBOVER)
|
|||
Post Reply | Page <1 14151617> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |