Ben Youngs - citing

[snoopster]

Snoopster wrote-:

I don't agree on this - the touch judge said he saw two punches thrown, no mention of the knee which suggests he missed it rather than saw it and didn't think it was worth a yellow. Regardless of that though, the citing officer has to make up his own mind if the knee and punches were worthy of more than just a reversed penalty which is what counts.

But my point is that the TJ stood alongside the two of them on the ground with his flag out. He was on the pitch not three feet away. What was there to miss?
Having clearly seen it (unlike in the LV final) he deemed it not worthy of a card. Look at it again.
I can't believe all this about wanting him cited.

Ben did clearly drop his knee on the player though and it is the role of the citing officer to cite anyone guilty of foul play either missed or dealt with insufficiently by the ref. Either way, what Youngs did falls into one of those two categories though given the touch judge didn't mention the most serious part of Youngs's offence it does seem reasonable to me to assume he missed it... he isn't there just to keep an eye on Youngs but all 30 players and the ball so it is more than possible he was trying to keep an eye on play and missed the knee.

[Smudge]

In that case he is in urgent need of a visit to Specsavers.

[APJones]

smurfgotya said
Would you have been happy if Ben's knee had broken a rib and punctured a lung! which is a crazy statement. It was a gentle drop down on the knee as a retaliation for being held onto, The couple of missed slaps from BY didn't as he was still eing held. Then the other irish player joined in at full pelt and really let rip . Out of all the miscreants it is he that should have had the penalty awarded against him for a late tackle and a tackling a man off the ball and after the ref had blown his whistle. It was dealt with on the fielsd and citing shouldn't come into it. The ref should have reversed the penalty and put it back onto to.Gibson. Anyway why was the TJ not on the touch line ? He was 3 - 4 metres into the field of play and he said thumps to the face which was blatantly wrong . The TJ needs to be investigated too methinks.

[bluehumber]

Lets get this in to perspective, Ben for reasons known only to himself broke the rules IF HE GETS CITED so be it, people on this forum were baying for blood last week re the Clark incident ( including myself ). If you play a contact sport there will be contact legally or not, if it's illegal the powers that be should deal with it irrespective of which club the player plays for. I know as Tigers supporters we think our club appears to be penalised more than others, we have to live with it though wether we agree or not. One thing is for sure Sky pundits and L I staff will do / have done as much as they can to highlight Ben's actions, which is the thing I do disagree with this should be left to the officials and citing officer alone.

[WhitecapTiger]

One thing is for sure Sky pundits and L I staff will do / have done as much as they can to highlight Ben's actions, which is the thing I do disagree with this should be left to the officials and citing officer alone.

Agree bluehumber. Let the powers that be decide, some clubs will do their utmost to cause a 'hoohah', this is why I agreed that Tigers were right to 'make noise' over last week's incident and there was a distinct lack of 'at the time condemnation' and repeated replays from the 'pundits' last week. (Though last week was SKY and yesterday was ESPN). However, I wouldn't really think, or expect, that Tigers would make the same kind of complaint over yesterday's incident given all the factors - player got up played on etc

I think Tigers should 'ban' YBY for 2 weeks in one of those uber cynical moves to influence the citing officer and disciplinary panel.............which will give him time to recover from his injury (That is slightly tongue in cheek btw)

[GS]

One thing is for sure Sky pundits and L I staff will do / have done as much as they can to highlight Ben's actions, which is the thing I do disagree with this should be left to the officials and citing officer alone.

Can't believe I'm defending them but Sky had nothing to do with it, ESPN were showing the game. Ben Kay and Austin had their say and repeated it, as they did with the Manu tackle.

[WhitecapTiger]

Can't believe I'm defending them but Sky had nothing to do with it, ESPN were showing the game. Ben Kay and Austin had their say and repeated it, as they did with the Manu tackle.

Didn't they disagree over the Manu tackle, Ben saying it was illegal and Oz pointing out that BOTH arms wrapped? It was only because Bowden's quick hands got the ball away before Manu hit him that made it look dodgy to begin with.

[Grubbers Mate]

Lets get this in to perspective, Ben for reasons known only to himself broke the rules IF HE GETS CITED so be it, people on this forum were baying for blood last week re the Clark incident ( including myself ). If you play a contact sport there will be contact legally or not, if it's illegal the powers that be should deal with it irrespective of which club the player plays for. I know as Tigers supporters we think our club appears to be penalised more than others, we have to live with it though wether we agree or not. One thing is for sure Sky pundits and L I staff will do / have done as much as they can to highlight Ben's actions, which is the thing I do disagree with this should be left to the officials and citing officer alone.

Hi, Saints fan here (probably as popular as a f**t in a spacemans suit) not trolling (Sapajo please note). Have not seen the incident so wont comment and wouldn't anyway. My issue, posted also on Saints site, is the current desire of everyone to get everyone else in trouble. From Stephen (look sir someone bit my finger) Ferris to your very own Richard ( the worst thing I have ever seen on a rugby pitch) Cockers and now the LI team bleating. For pitys sake let the powers that be deal with it.

Worst of all are scrum halves ( ours included at the top of the list) who would rather stand at the back of a ruck pointing randomly at arms and hands hoping to gain a penalty rather than getting the pigging ball out and giving us more than 40 minutes game time in each 80 minute period. Got to go now, the nurse is coming with my medication.

[sapajo]

[
Hi, Saints fan here (probably as popular as a f**t in a spacemans suit) not trolling (Sapajo please note)..[/quote]

I hereby consider myself noted

[Rykard]

the problem is all these little off the ball niggles start to escalate and until the powers that be start to punish the instigator as well as the retaliation it will get worse..

[sapajo]

the problem is all these little off the ball niggles start to escalate and until the powers that be start to punish the instigator as well as the retaliation it will get worse..

Agreed, the problem is that the officials (mainly linesman)ignore the many off the ball incidents during the game and only show any interest and/or take action following retaliation action. Furthermore imho they are only interested in refereeing the touch line. Both aspects are imho equally wrong but the officials do not subscribe to "he who threw the first stone" should be penalised and in doing so give free reign to the cynical cheating wind up merchants.

[sam16111986]

I can understand Youngs's frustration, he was taken off the ball or blocked approaching rucks repeatedly by LI players. The Gibson incident was the straw that broke the camels back and there wasn't nearly so much of it in the second half. In that respect you could say Youngs dealt with the problem. However, he is likely to miss a week or two because of the knee. There were probably better ways of dealing with the situation (like stamping on Gibson's arms as they held him) but the knee and the punches are too much like retaliation for the ref to ignore.

If anyones got it on Sky+ or similar then have a look at the footage after Allinson charges in. His right hand is around the eye area on Youngs as he pushes his head to the floor. Now I don't think that's intentional in any way but if Cueto got a 9 week ban last year for something very similar then will the citing commission be consistent and ban Allinson?

[sapajo]

If anyones got it on Sky+ or similar then have a look at the footage after Allinson charges in. His right hand is around the eye area on Youngs as he pushes his head to the floor. Now I don't think that's intentional in any way but if Cueto got a 9 week ban last year for something very similar then will the citing commission be consistent and ban Allinson?

Sam he has to be cited first before any potential punishment and that as we all know is not a given and more likely than not he will not be.

[parkerd68]

As far as I am aware, no official at all saw the Clark incident, so it wasn't like it was seen but ignored and deemed "uncardworthy".

Also, if a touch judge can say through his mic when there's a penalty, for example during scrums you can hear him call the colour of shirt to be penalised, why can't he do the same in open play. Whilst it might not stop the escalation of an incident, if the ref blew sooner from a TJ's call, there is a possibility it could.

IMHO, Youngs should get a ban, but Allinson was worse as he wasn't even involved initially. He went into Youngs at a fair rate. He didn't try and stop the scuffle, he went in to antagonise, and that is out of order.

[Smudge]

You are free to have your opinion. I disagree, mine is that the bloke on the flaw was cheating. BY was hardly going to let it go and just stand there.
Frankly if he bent his knee it was with no force and the TG gave it no credence.
It was dealt with on the field.No damage done. No further action required.