Leicester Tigers

Obviously deserved his ban but... He's completed it and he's apologized - We move on. A good skipper in my opinion as along as the refs haven't run out of patience with him.

yellow_balaclava_hunter wrote:
I cannot prove or disprove anything

My point exactly.

YBH - you are accussing the RFU of doctoring a dated report of their quasi-legal process. That would be implausible and ultimately pointless since many hard/computer copies of the original report are in circulation. The only plausible explanation is that the claims of a promise from Ed Morrisson wer...

YBH - Your logic there is completely flawed. However it is also irrelevant because I've re-checked the RFU report. The search facility doesn't find the word "employed" anywhere in the document. Why did you quote it? I should have confirmed your quote earlier. The actual relevant quote is &...

Thanks for further making my point YBH. By all of those definitions a TMO was employed in the final so EM's promise was kept. As I said the RFU isn't perfect but that doesn't make it correct for people to invent crimes that they've committed. Thebear... If your equating some naughty words on the Nor...

CoalvilleBob keeps requesting facts from all and sundry, but all he has ever offered up is an opinion on others opinions. Their opinion being R.C. deserved a nine week ban, for using a few chose old Anglo-Saxon words in a private conversation with the fourth official.The only fact i can add is that...

Yes Jonlin I wanted fact. Sadly you can only provide opinion. One which I disagree with, but of course we're all entitled to our own views. I'm not on a moral crusade. I just refuse to buy these claims that we've been mistreated by the RFU without some sort of evidence. However whenever I ask for it...

Listening to the show, it was stated that the RFU may have had a hand in RC not being represented by his chosen Barrister, Richard Smith. They were inferring that he had accepted the brief but pulled out without explanation late in the process. He also does work for the RFU. If this was a legal pro...

Jimmy Skitz wrote: after listening to that I can see the club suing the RFU

On what grounds?

the fact the RFU seem to have their own agenda. So please everyone LET IT GO !!!!! In terms of this incident I believe that the agenda of the RFU is that they don't want DoRs to confront match officials in the manner that Cockerill did. That doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Appeals for everyone to ...

JG, I deplore your lack of faith in the RFU. I have every confidence that they will consistently apply nine match bans to all for the use of foul (not abusive) language in every future instance just as they did equally at the 2013 final. And now it’s breakfast time so I’m off to catch some bacon wi...

Perhaps the club believe like I do that Richard Cockerill's actions were justified given the circumstances, therefore no apology is necessary and it's the RFU that should apologise for their disgraceful behaviour over many years. . Couldn't disagree more. Anyone who has played or coached rugby has ...

The RFU are like those people you see in the street dressed in badly fitting clothes and think "Jezz, do you not own a mirror", totally oblivious to how others see them. Do you look in the mirror often? What most people remember about this incident is that they saw our DoR shouting in the...

Thanks for your efforts Whitecap Tiger. Some interesting stuff in there but, as you say, no mention of Ed Morrison's promise which a few on here claim was broken. Surely one of those who complained about the broken promise can point us towards it?

still not responding as to why the emails/complaints and the medical staff member talking to were included in the transcript? Sorry you had so many conspiracy theories I didn't have time to point out the flaws in all of them. My guess is that its because they describe the context in which the incid...