Haskell to miss trip to Leicester

[Tiger_Dad]

The saying 'It never rains, it pours' springs to mind.

Shame....

Reading the boards findings the whole incident sound a complete shambles...

[tigermad]

Shame about Haskell not playing on Friday but still a tough call for Leicester against Wasps but should get the win.

[jools43]

Is it me, or had it been a tigers player head-butting someone would they not have received at least the full 6 weeks ban?! Apparently, him not being a dirty player meant only one week, yet I seem to remember a late 'tackle' (shoulder barge) on Jordan Crane that was never cited when we played them last season.

Still... he's a threat I'd sooner not see on the pitch on friday!

[quincy]

Another disgraceful sentence. A minimun 6 weeks drops to 1 week. What do Tigers get for the same offence? Certainly not one week. A disgrace.

[TTRITH]

If that was a certain Mr. Croft or a Mr. Crane then i'd have expected the worse and be looking at Corry playing quite a few games this season.

Would be intresting if Johnno doesn't start with Haskell as i feel the only reason he didn't aquire a more substainal ban was to keep him fit for England.

[dailywaffle]

I see that disciplinary paranoia is still alive and kicking on this forum.

It is complete fantasy to suggest that, for example, Tom Croft would be dealt with far more severely than Haskell were they to commit identical offences. Purely because he plays for Leicester.

Still, if people wish to believe that the RFU disciplinary process is institutionally biased against Leicester then good luck to you.

[Bill W]

Daily

Of course the RFU disciplinary processes are not institutionally biased against Leicester. Although some may feel that way.

I paste the comment I made on a different thread:


It is, I think, an unprecedented event, that a disciplinary panel (and headed by HHJ JB himself) makes a public, severe, critisim not only of the match officials but also of the citing officer.

Was this why HHJ chose to head the panel himself?

The transcript makes particular reference to the IRB directives to referees on "zero tolerence" etc. And the transcript was published exceedingly quickly (albeit on the home page and not on the discipline site which still thinks we are in the 2007/8 season).

Perhaps HHJ JB perceives some of the problems we, the fans, perceive? Could that be?

Justice (whatever that is) must not only be done it must be seen to be done.

[Bill W]

There is a further implcation to all of this.

To cite, the citing officer needs to be pursauded that the referee should/would have awarded a red card.

Haskell and Birkett were found guilty. Therefore each should (in the view of the disciplianey panel) have been red carded.

And thus so should Wood and Rawlinson since the citing officer should have cited them (according to the panel).

Four red cars in one game?

When did that last happen?

[dailywaffle]

I agree Bill that the most interesting thing to come out of all this is the very public criticism of the officials and citing officer. I'm not sure what the motivation is, but we will see if this a new era for disciplinary transparency.

[kornboy130]

I see that disciplinary paranoia is still alive and kicking on this forum.

It is complete fantasy to suggest that, for example, Tom Croft would be dealt with far more severely than Haskell were they to commit identical offences. Purely because he plays for Leicester.

Still, if people wish to believe that the RFU disciplinary process is institutionally biased against Leicester then good luck to you.

With you on that daily, but i would say the bans often fit England matches - say a foreign player, of any club, has often been treated more severly when there are examples of England players being given bans just upto the next England match.

[Crumby]

Having just seen the pictures in the mail

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/index.html

I dont care what the provocation a 1 week ban is a joke compared to the sentences handed out to Julien and Seru last season. Haskells' actions could have resulted in very serious injury and he could have stopped the assualt by other means

[Bill W]

I agree Bill that the most interesting thing to come out of all this is the very public criticism of the officials and citing officer. I'm not sure what the motivation is, but we will see if this a new era for disciplinary transparency.

Just so daily. Coaches may not (publicly) criticise the match officials but HHJ can?

[Dave J]

I suspect the insects won't be that bothered about the ban as with another game next Wednesday home to Bath they may opt to rest some players for the game against Tigers anyway. I will be interested to see whether other teams do that or whether they'll pick full strength teams for both GP games and rest players for the EDF.

[dailywaffle]

I haven't been keeping up to speed with this incident but, if it was as the Daily Mail describes a 'flying head butt', then a one-week ban is obscenely short.

IMHO, using a head-butt is a cowardly way to fight: it's something I expect from roundyballers because they're too scared to damage their manicures. A 'flying head-butt' from a 6'4" 17st 6lb forward can be quite a dangerous thing.

The media does us all no favours. He wasn't found guilty of any sort of head butt, whether flying or not. I have seen reports stating that Haskell has been banned (1 week) for a 'head butt', when it is quite clear from the transcript that he has not been banned for, to be precise, 'striking an opponent with the head'. He has been banned for 'dangerous play in a ruck'.

[westy154]

...i would say the bans often fit England matches - say a foreign player, of any club, has often been treated more severly when there are examples of England players being given bans just upto the next England match.

Indeed, I recall several of Mr Johnson's ban expiring at rather convenient times. As for the whole paranoid against Tigers thing, no chance.