Julian - Why plead Guilty ? A non Rugby related decision ?

[mike]

I'm beginning to think that this Club are on a different Planet . Your best available Prop is facing a Hearing -in most universes he would plead NOT Guilty , is found Guilty and sentenced missing the Final . However , we appeal and he is able to play in the Final and we beat Wasps!
What do we do instead - we plead guilty making an appeal impossible , making JW unavailable for the game and we probably lose !
At the same time our Chief Executive goes on record saying that there will be a Review of the Coaching Team and ML's job is not safe .
This is 4 days before the most crucial game of our season - is the real Agenda that the Board want to get rid of ML so much that they are plotting the downfall of their own team .
Wasps must be having a good laugh at our expense !

[Bud]

That is absolute rubbish.

[Gate]

Ooh, a conspiracy theory! Top stuff. Can I just point out that nobody has accounted for Loffreda's whereabouts when JFK was in Dallas in 1963? And "Julian White, top-notch farming tighthead prop" is probably an anagram for something really dodgy.

[Hot_Charlie]

The match was televised and I believe the incident in question was entirely visible - hence making a not guilty plea unfeasible (without looking like idiots in the subsequent hearing). However, compared to some stamping incidents it was fairly "tame", not particularly dangerous (near the head etc), so hopefully the clubs suspension and JW's apology may be deemed sufficient by the board(particularly in view of JW's exemplary disciplinary record...).

[Iain]

Worst post ever from Mike!

He pleads guilty, we give him an arbitary ban and keep our fingers crossed that the RFU deem it sufficient.

He pleads not guilty, is most likely found guilty and DEFINITELY misses the final.

Not rocket science is it?

The thought of the board deliberately wanting us to lose is laughable and moronic - and no I won't be taking that back!

[FrontRowUnionMember]

When do we find the outcome?
Also, has anyone heard any team news from Wasps, only they must have prop issues of their own, Vickery already out, Barnard and Payne both came off against Bath.

[Off Piste Tiger]

I think the Julian White hearing was this evening .So hopefully we should know tomorrow.

[Mr_Ben]

Not certain, but have a good idea which incident it was that led to this tribunal.

As others have said, chances of him not getting some kind of suspension are pretty slim, so just hoping the club ban will be considered enough.

Have just tried googling "julian white disciplinary" for any news of the outcome but got 14,000 results

[Iain]

Have just tried googling "julian white disciplinary" for any news of the outcome but got 14,000 results

Well I knew his disciplinary history wasn't great but

[Mr_Ben]

My thoughts exactly Iain!

Suppose it would make for a quiet season if Julian managed to avoid ending up in front of a disciplinary panel at least once

[KingKong(2.15)]

Julian has always been a boisterous kind of chap.
You plead guilty like in a court of law.
If its blatantly obvious you broken into a house, committed battery/gbh etc, you get less time for admitting your guilt and at least trying to look repentant.

[tigermilo]

Poor old Julian does have previous, so I fear he will go down! I think the hearing is later today (weds) but I may be way out on that one.
I reckon we should review the coaching at the end of evry season, good or bad. Also, ML is not the only one to be in the spotlight. Messrs Cockeril and Back need to answer a few questions too. Maybe they go and ML uses other guys?
Lets wait and see...

[kevf]

so mike once again shows what a prat he really is... JW ban by club deemed sufficient.. can play saturday..

as for the review of the coaching staff.. i would expect they do this each year as well as whole review of the season what did go rigth what didn't go right what needs to change how can we avoid the same thing happening next year.. it happens in most business's following a big campaign... no one said it was specifically directed at ML... should the managment find anyone lacking the either have to kick thme up the arsh or get rid...

mike can i suggest that sometimes you engage brain before typing the tripe you normally do.. you don't really seem to have a clue about life in general.. maybe becaue you are some 14 year old spotty yoof.. oh and maybe look on the bright side occasionally... ML has said he can't control what happens after saturday which everway the game goes.. he's not worrying about it... till after saturday..

[tigergirl]

Seems like the club got it right Mike! Let's hope the tactics on the field on Saturday are as good as those off it.

[MPG]

so mike once again shows what a prat he really is... JW ban by club deemed sufficient.. can play saturday..

as for the review of the coaching staff.. i would expect they do this each year as well as whole review of the season what did go rigth what didn't go right what needs to change how can we avoid the same thing happening next year.. it happens in most business's following a big campaign... no one said it was specifically directed at ML... should the managment find anyone lacking the either have to kick thme up the arsh or get rid...

mike can i suggest that sometimes you engage brain before typing the tripe you normally do.. you don't really seem to have a clue about life in general.. maybe becaue you are some 14 year old spotty yoof.. oh and maybe look on the bright side occasionally... ML has said he can't control what happens after saturday which everway the game goes.. he's not worrying about it... till after saturday..

Whilst I don't agree with what mike said about pleading guilty at the hearing - because whilst you may not necessarliy be able to appeal the decision per se (as you had admitted your guilt), natural justice would dictate I feel that you could still appeal the length of the sentence or that the hearing didn't take account of certain mitigating factors, etc.

However, my gripe here is that I don't understand why people cannot express their views without others criticising in such a personal way as above.

In the end, it is that person's view - and as long as it's not abusive, defamatory, etc - surely they should be able to express them without fear of responses like this above.

Further, are we now saying that 14 year old spotty yoofs cannot make a valid contribution to the debate because of their age or their spots...?

I do not have a problem kevf with you expressing your view where you disagree - but I do with the way you went about it in this case - and it seems to be more prevalent on the forum than previously.