All Ospreys discussion here please!

[kevf]

could you please point out to me where tigers managment have insisted that the gme be replayed? I may have missed it but as yet i have not seen anything of the like. I have only seen a complaint to the ERC witha request it be investigated. feel fee to tell me i have missed the "wewant the game replayed" BillW am i missing something?

I am not sure why you ask me this question.

However, several press reports quoted Peter Wheeler as saying that a replay would be a fair outcome (my words). The Leicester statements did not mention sanctions but merely called for an investigation. I believe Tigers sports lawyers did suggest a replay at the hearing.

Bill i merely asked you as you seem to be the font of all knowledge when it comes to tigers.. i have read as much as i could and have not seen any where official about a demand for a replay so was wondering where people had got it from i was under the impression tigers mamangement had purely as ked for the incident to be investigated so as it wouldn't happen again. Which i think is only right and proper.

[Chobbsy]

[quote="Bill W (2)"][quote="Albert"]Ah well. Two week ban and a fine on a par with England's when they did it. Shame we lose Byrne for the Wales England match, but so be it. Hope we don't appeal and that is that.[/quote]

Concur Albert. Both did plead guilty though so appeal unlikely.[/quote]

No Byrne has appealed, hence why Wales are waiting for the outcome before they name thier team

[Bill W (2)]

Ah well. Two week ban and a fine on a par with England's when they did it. Shame we lose Byrne for the Wales England match, but so be it. Hope we don't appeal and that is that.

Concur Albert. Both did plead guilty though so appeal unlikely.

No Byrne has appealed, hence why Wales are waiting for the outcome before they name thier team

Yes indeed, and this is discussed earlier in the thread and after my post you quote.

Risks having ban extended. Hearing will likely be before England game.

[Bill W (2)]

Appeal hearing on Tuesday.

Byrne/Gatland/WRU on very high risk option.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/8489043.stm

[Smudge]

So it is late Monday and we have no statement by the club who were going to
comment when the full judgement was received.
Surely they have had it by now?

Still no one has come back to me on the board with the reason for the aggrieved
party aka Tigers, not having the right to reply.

[Bill W (2)]

So it is late Monday and we have no statement by the club who were going to
comment when the full judgement was received.
Surely they have had it by now?

Still no one has come back to me on the board with the reason for the aggrieved
party aka Tigers, not having the right to reply.

The full judgement is not yet public.

Prosecution was ERC, Defence was Ospreys and Byrne.

Tigers were merely party to the action and therefore have no right to appeal

[Pete]

I am not generally in favour of increasing bans when players appeal, but in this case I feel it would be entirely justifiable. Byrne did something remarkably stupid which clearly affected the scoreline of the game or should have done, and pleaded guilty. Now he is very obviously appealing against his ban merely because he fancies playing for Wales against England, which the ban would prevent.

Increase the ban to four weeks for completely wasting everyone's time and trying to make the process even more of a mockery than he and his Club already have.

[Tircoeds]

Byrne did something remarkably stupid which clearly affected the scoreline of the game or should have done, ...

ERC ruled that he had no material effect on the game, unles you mean that Tigers should have been awarded a penalty but weren't, in which case, how is that Byrne's fault ?

Increase the ban to four weeks for completely wasting everyone's time and trying to make the process even more of a mockery than he and his Club already have.

I assume the process you are taking about is the misconduct hearing for Byrne and the Ospreys.

How exactly have they [Byrne and the Ospreys] made the 'process' a mockery ?

By turning up and pleading guitly ?

They are merely following up on their right to appeal.

Nothing wrong with a bit of passion, but your post, IMO, is out of order.

[Bill W (2)]

Nothing wrong with a bit of passion, but your post, IMO, is out of order.

Pete is perfectly entitled to his opinion Tircoeds.

Just as Lee Byre is entitled to appeal.

The appeal Tribunal may feel that the finding that Lee's action had no effect on the outcome on the match was unreasonable - or at least the failure of the referee to punish it according to the Laws of the Game was.

They might find that the punishment of a one match (de facto) ban was too lenient.

The process a mockery? That is a valid opinion. Tincu, etc etc etc - mockery, farce, shambles, are all words that spring to mind.

[bluntiger]

In my opinion this is a cynical abuse of the appeal system.

Byrne and the Wales management are using the appeal system to gamble. The appeal system should be there to give an opportunity to people who genuinely feel that a misjustice has been done. Byrne pleaded guilty! He just doesn't like the sentence.

If he succeeds and the ban is reduced, it will effectively be no ban at all. If he fails and the ban is not extended, no harm done. If the ban is extended for a frivilous appeal, then a three or four-week ban would mean that Byrne will miss the Wales' home game against Scotland. But would still be available for the France game.

The Wales management have decided to risk losing him for the Scotland game at the Millenium in the hope of having him available for the England game at Twickenham. And that is, for me, an abuse of the appeal system.

[Pete]

I have not forgotten that Corry lost the end of a great career just because he did nothing wrong, neither intentionally nor actually.

A two week ban for Byrne being so stupid is a rather light punishment.

ps there would have been no need to give a penalty to Tigers had Byrne and the Ospreys officials not been so badly organised, and so intent on it remaining that way whilst Tigers were attacking. So it was, at least indirectly, Byrne's fault that the penalty was not given.

[salcombe bob]

Pete and blunttiger are dead right.

[Tircoeds]

Pete is perfectly entitled to his opinion Tircoeds.

Indeed, and I am entitled to mine. Did I say he wasn't entitled to his opinion ? Read my post again ... I said, im my opinion, that the post was out of order, specifically the part where the OP wanted Byrne to get a four week ban.

The process a mockery? That is a valid opinion. Tincu, etc etc etc - mockery, farce, shambles, are all words that spring to mind.

Again, twisting my words, I never defended the process ..... the OP said that Byrne was making a mockery out of the process . So in your words he is making a mockery out of a mockery ?!

All Byrne is doing is following the process as laid out by the officiating ... people.

Byrne probably expected a sentence in line with what others have received for 'similar' offences ... hence the appeal.

Wales are not appealing here, it is Byrne, Wales were not faced with charges from the tigers game ... it was a club game not an international.

Anyhow, I would have thought that England would want Byrne to be playing so that if you beat us, we wont have any excuses

[Bill W (2)]

Hmmm! Pete's actual words were "more of a mockery".

I disagree that it is out of order for Pete to make the observations he did (increase sentence etc).

As you no doubt have noticed from the subsequent posts others appear to feel the same.