Dylan Hartley banned for six months

purslane-tiger · Post by **purslane-tiger** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:54 pm

Latest from bbc website

Northampton hooker Dylan Hartley banned for six months for eye gouging two Wasps forwards.

Must have been bad.

Ben the Tiger · Post by **Ben the Tiger** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:56 pm

WOW! That must have been bad.

Iain · Post by **Iain** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:21 pm

Hard to comment without seeing the incidents but if he did gouge two players' eyes then he deserves everything he gets. It is accepted in rugby that fighting and skulduggery does go on, but the unwritten rule is not to the eyes or the privates. Yes its a long ban, probaby assisted by the summer coming up. May have cost him an outside shot at a World Cup place as well. I'm sure he won't do it again!

Stu_F · Post by **Stu_F** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:26 pm

Eye gouging! That is serious.

However I suspect he'll appeal and get a reduced sentence, his current ban is 26 weeks, if it reduces to 20 weeks that'll make him available for the new season and mean he's missed 2 matches!!!!!

Marcos missed 3 matches after his ban, there is something fundamentally wrong with the disiplinary process! and this is not new, in the 1980s the RFU banned any player who was sent off during the season from international rugby in that season, a not too big punishment if you happened to be sent off in late March more severe if you were sent off in October and missed Autumn tests and the 5 Nations!

Ban people for a NUMBER OF MATCHES I say.

dunc · Post by **dunc** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:05 pm

I agree eye gouging and kicking(especially at heads) are criminal acts that should be stamped out of the game by severe punishments.

Simmo · Post by **Simmo** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:32 pm

Well deserved. There's no place for that sort of behaviour in our game. Hopefully there will be no appeal.

Tigersfan90 · Post by **Tigersfan90** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:39 pm

Stu_F wrote:Ban people for a NUMBER OF MATCHES I say.

It doesn't see right that he'll be missing most of his weeks after the season. Banning someone for a number of matches would seem more appropriate. Why miss weeks where he wouldn’t have the chance to play if he wanted!

RayDTuTu · Post by **RayDTuTu** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:44 pm

I guess we won't be signing him any time soon then?

Seriously, he is 21 (I think), one of the most talented young hookers in the country, and could be contracted to a club not in the premiership.

dunc · Post by **dunc** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:23 pm

Well he's not talented enough to be able to consistently throw a ball straight. By all accounts he was going to make the World Cup. Clearly now he won't so while yes he won't be missing many games while banned but he will be punished by knowing what he has missed out on.

g · Post by g » Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:24 pm

The ban should run from the start of next season. Not during the summer where he'll virtually be back for next season only missing a couple of games.

I hope if he does appeal he gets an extension.

Big Dai · Post by **Big Dai** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:33 pm

Is there ANY pattern to these bans? Admittedly I've not seen the incidents but this seems very serious stuff!

boondock · Post by **boondock** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:48 pm

gouging is not acceptable and if he did it he deserves a ban, but 26 weeks seems very long and smacks of the general inconsistency in the disciplinary procedures. there is a view on the saints board the length of ban has been coloured by barwells antagonism.

this partly fuelled by the way phil vickery, england captain was clearly seen to stamp on hartley during the gp game but not a whisper of any citing. and if hartley was out of order it wasnt picked up by sky at the time, which might be understandable, or seemingly reacted to by any of the players, which seems less likely.

in general principles i agree bans should be for matches not weeks.

overall though i think hartley is a precocious talent who will come back from this stronger and wiser.

and also a saintsman - he was unequivocal last night at the player awards about staying at saints next season, come what may this weekend. 8o)

dailywaffle · Post by **dailywaffle** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:52 pm

He's a talent boondock, I agree ..... but he has (fairly or not) got a reputation as a dirty player. And that was before this incident.

Someone at Saints needs to straighten him out, I would suggest.

simon redshaw · Post by **simon redshaw** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:53 pm

I agree with you, Boondock. I wager that a Waps player would have got away with it. In fact, they seem to get away with most things!! :mad: :mad: But if you are a Tigers player or a saints player you are more likely to be punished.

I bet Lawrence Dallaglio doesn't get cited or punished for attempting gauging of a Saints player.

g · Post by g » Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:57 pm

A stamp is totally different to gouging. And IMO he's got off very lightly. There is no rugby to be played in the summer so all he gets is a few games missed next season. And if it was gouging on 3 different players then IMO the ban should have been longer.

To miss a few games of rugby when he deliberately tried to blind someone is a joke and for Boondock to talk of inconsistencies is a joke.

I would have banned him for 6 months starting from next season.

Neil Back got 6 months for pushing the ref. He immediately apologised but still it didn't work in his favour. Hartley pleaded not guilty and didn't apologise. So for me he has got of lightly. The inconsistency here is that he has not had a longer ban IMO.