sea_point wrote:

RonanL wrote:

swift4prez wrote: everyone knows if you leave your hand on a face for long enough while two men are moving around fingers can slip into eyes.

This is what annoys me about the current situation. Leaving your hands on someones face, and accidentally brushing against their eyes is completely different to intentionally gouging. I personally think anyone caught gouging should have the book thrown at them, <strong>but a minimum ban of 12 weeks for "contact with the eye area" is ridiculous in my opinion.</strong>

Do you mean to lenient or too harsh?

I've never been gouged personally but I've been punched to the head a few times in games and fishhooked (once) over the years on the rugby pitch.

Never had anyone go for my eyes thank f*ck, but the punishments for doing so deliberately or accidently should be absolutely prohibitive which they clearly aren't at the moment because we still see guys who's livelihood depends on them being able to play still getting caught.

In some cases I think it's way too harsh. Don't get me wrong - if a guy intentionally gouges, then he should get a crazy long ban. But if two lads are pushing and shoving, and some fingers happen to glance across the face by accident, that's not worthy of a ban in my opinion. I haven't seen the replay of this case, but I remember it pretty well, and the guy from the Glasgow team was perfectly happy to shake hands with Macca on the pitch. To my mind, what the Clermont player was doing to Leo Cullen towards the end of their recent semi final was WAY worse. No citing in that case to the best of my knowledge. I suppose to summarise, I think some common sense needs to be applied.

RonanL wrote:

swift4prez wrote: everyone knows if you leave your hand on a face for long enough while two men are moving around fingers can slip into eyes.

This is what annoys me about the current situation. Leaving your hands on someones face, and accidentally brushing against their eyes is completely different to intentionally gouging. I personally think anyone caught gouging should have the book thrown at them, but a minimum ban of 12 weeks for "contact with the eye area" is ridiculous in my opinion.

Do you mean to lenient or too harsh?

I've never been gouged personally but I've been punched to the head a few times in games and fishhooked (once) over the years on the rugby pitch.

Never had anyone go for my eyes thank f*ck, but the punishments for doing so deliberately or accidently should be absolutely prohibitive which they clearly aren't at the moment because we still see guys who's livelihood depends on them being able to play still getting caught.

swift4prez wrote: everyone knows if you leave your hand on a face for long enough while two men are moving around fingers can slip into eyes.

This is what annoys me about the current situation. Leaving your hands on someones face, and accidentally brushing against their eyes is completely different to intentionally gouging. I personally think anyone caught gouging should have the book thrown at them, but a minimum ban of 12 weeks for "contact with the eye area" is ridiculous in my opinion.

Salmson wrote:

Yes, and the IRFU were the worst of a very bad lot. This came to a head after they banned Jennings and Fogarty for punching offences against Connacht that Fitzgibbon didn't see (no surprise there), only to overturn them on appeal on a technicality - they decided they had no jurisdiction over the game - so they could play for Leinster in the HEC.

That's only partially true don't know about the Fogarty case but with the Jennings case after he punched Andrew Farley straight in the face and got cited it was done verbally (like every citing case up to that point in the league had been). Jennings got off on this technicality:

"The Irish Rugby Football Union Disciplinary Panel held an appeal hearing this evening, Thursday, 15th January 2009 to hear an appeal by Leinster flanker Shane Jennings...
Jennings received a three week suspension for striking Connacht second row Andrew Farley during the second half of the Leinster v Connacht Magners League game.

The three man IRFU Appeal Committee found that under the Magners League Tournament Rules and particularly the Disciplinary Rules therein that no jurisdiction is given to a disciplinary committee to investigate a citing complaint of a citing commissioner appointed under those rules.

As a result the appeal of Shane Jennings is allowed and the suspension lifted. Shane Jennings is free to play from this point on."

Apparently no rule had been written stating that any of the RU's had jurisdiction over the Celtic League with the Clubs following the cititings in the ''spirit'' of the competition. This lasted until Michael Cheika, Leinster and Jennings. The rule was subsequently changed that season a week or two later. There was alot of hard feelings towards Leinster because of it. It was one of the reasons that when Jennings got banned for so long when he 'eye-gouged' Nick Kennedy that Leinster and Jennings got F*ck all support from the IRFU. Karma is a b*tch sometimes :evil:

after watching it again the 5 does look like 6 in my defence.

on the bad side macca had his hand on his face, nose and mouth and bit of eyes for around a good 10 second. he had plenty of time to take his hand down. didnt happen by mistake, everyone knows if you leave your hand on a face for long enough while two men are moving around fingers can slip into eyes.

pure stupid stuff

seen that during the game but was sure it was mul. after few drinks... 5 and 6 look the same...
i writhen on this page that mul would be in trouble on monday.

it was very very nasty. happened at 32 min i think if anyone want to see it on tg4 player,

as much as i hate saying this.... :sick: ban the fucker for a long time, that was nasty and no place for that shit in connacht rugby

It's looking like POC might not make the trip to New Zealand, so Macca will be raging with himself if something stupid like this costs him his seat on the plane...

ummm, wrote: It's ironic that a few years ago fans were moaning about how the Magners League allowed each competing union to have their own disciplinary hearings, which led to players getting soft bans and being miraculously available for their country just in time for the 6N etc.

Yes, and the IRFU were the worst of a very bad lot. This came to a head after they banned Jennings and Fogarty for punching offences against Connacht that Fitzgibbon didn't see (no surprise there), only to overturn them on appeal on a technicality - they decided they had no juristiction over the game - so they could play for Leinster in the HEC.

It's ironic that a few years ago fans were moaning about how the Magners League allowed each competing union to have their own disciplinary hearings, which led to players getting soft bans and being miraculously available for their country just in time for the 6N etc.

But now we have a situation where the Pro12 has independent disciplinary panels, putting the 4 unions in a position where the English and French are the only ones handing out the soft bans. Honesty isn't always the best policy, it would seem.

Not sure he record will be seen as very good.

He has been suspended once this year for a high tackle in the Toulouse match, and when the ERC disciplinary panel were determining if he was a repeat offender they went all the way back to 2008, which meant he got an extra week tacked on.

RonanL wrote:

sea_point wrote: According to the Glasgow site, Macca has been cited. Would rule him out of the NZ tour if proven...

www.glasgowwarriors.org wrote: Connacht Lock, Mike McCarthy, has been cited for making contact with the eyes or eye area of an opponent in the RaboDirect PRO12 match between Glasgow Warriors and Connacht on Saturday.

The date and venue of the hearing, before an independent PRO12 Disciplinary Committee, will be confirmed in due course.

www.glasgowwarriors.org/content/view/5351/47/

It happened during the mass skirmish, Macca got involved with his opposite number, and he was definitely pushing the guy in the face. It looked bad, but it would have to be viewed in slow motion to decide if you'd consider it "contact with the eyes or eye area". To my mind, that rule is meant to stop gouging, what Macca did definitely wasn't gouging. They shook hands afterwards, and got on with the game.

Even if he's inadvertently made contact with the eye-area then he will still be punished. Duty of care is with the player. Macca's recent disciplinary record has been very good, but unlikely to help him out of a lower level sanction if he's made contact anywhere near the eyes...

It makes no sense if comparing them in isolation.

But after the Burger incident the iRB sent a letter to all governing bodies telling them to hand out bigger bans. Rees was banned by the ErC because it was a Heineken Cup match, and the ERC tend to hand out the stiffest bans, other leagues less so.

Considering the pathetic ban Burger & others got it was the right course of action by the iRB and led to Dupuy getting 24 weeks and Attoub 70 for two horrible gouges. The problem with it is the recommended sanction for even the least intentioned contact is 12 weeks, so Rees was always going to get a huge ban. Had he done that pre-Burger he probably wouldn't even have been cited.

The iRB walk a narrow tightrope between trying to stamp out thuggery and being overly prescriptive. It's not easy and nobody really wins.

Did anyone see the game of TG4? Was anything shown? Court of public opinion and all that.

P.S. Can't beleive Rees got 12 weeks for that. It makes Burger's ban of 8 weeks on the Lions tour after trying to pluck Fitzgerald's eye out seem even more ludicrous.

Even the slightest contact is enough to get a hefty ban. Richie Rees got 12 weeks for this

www.rugbydump.com/2011/01/1771/richie-re...-dylan-hartleys-eyes

sea_point wrote: According to the Glasgow site, Macca has been cited. Would rule him out of the NZ tour if proven...

www.glasgowwarriors.org wrote: Connacht Lock, Mike McCarthy, has been cited for making contact with the eyes or eye area of an opponent in the RaboDirect PRO12 match between Glasgow Warriors and Connacht on Saturday.

The date and venue of the hearing, before an independent PRO12 Disciplinary Committee, will be confirmed in due course.

www.glasgowwarriors.org/content/view/5351/47/

It happened during the mass skirmish, Macca got involved with his opposite number, and he was definitely pushing the guy in the face. It looked bad, but it would have to be viewed in slow motion to decide if you'd consider it "contact with the eyes or eye area". To my mind, that rule is meant to stop gouging, what Macca did definitely wasn't gouging. They shook hands afterwards, and got on with the game.

connachtexile wrote: Oh FFS!

I really hope this isn't true with MOD gone and O'Connell looking unlikely he has a real chance of making the bench for the NZ games. Was it the independent commissioner or a complaint from Glasgow?

I really hope this isn't true because if this is judged to be intentional I don't want someone who would do that representing my province. I just hope it's deemed to be accidental if it's true.