tigerburnie wrote:It has been put to me that Cockers asked politely if the decision was to be put to the fourth official and although "agitated", at seeing his captain prone on the ground, did nothing to upset anyone and has not been reported for his behaviour or anything that he said.
Maybe you and your generation are getting a tad past all the excitement? or is this part of another aganda to besmurch our fine leader again?
Hmm It would appear that may be he didn't ask quite so politely, maybe he did upset someone and has in fact been reported for his behaviour and things which he said.
Still it's all a major conspiracy by everyone to besmirch our fine leader eh TigerBurnie?
tigerburnie wrote:It has been put to me that Cockers asked politely if the decision was to be put to the fourth official and although "agitated", at seeing his captain prone on the ground, did nothing to upset anyone and has not been reported for his behaviour or anything that he said.
Maybe you and your generation are getting a tad past all the excitement? or is this part of another aganda to besmurch our fine leader again?
Hmm It would appear that may be he didn't ask quite so politely, maybe he did upset someone and has in fact been reported for his behaviour and things which he said.
Still it's all a major conspiracy by everyone to besmirch our fine leader eh TigerBurnie?
And here was me thinking it was the fouth official he abused in order to try and get the decision referred to the TMO.
tigerburnie wrote:It has been put to me that Cockers asked politely if the decision was to be put to the fourth official and although "agitated", at seeing his captain prone on the ground, did nothing to upset anyone and has not been reported for his behaviour or anything that he said.
Maybe you and your generation are getting a tad past all the excitement? or is this part of another aganda to besmurch our fine leader again?
Hmm It would appear that may be he didn't ask quite so politely, maybe he did upset someone and has in fact been reported for his behaviour and things which he said.
Still it's all a major conspiracy by everyone to besmirch our fine leader eh TigerBurnie?
For once you are right Crumblies. It is a conspiracy by those sore losers from the allotment but then again you want believe that as you often seem to be in love with Boon! It's not the 4th official who has complained but Voldermort and Pudsey.
Of course this is my own opinion and other posters may have a different perceived factual viewpoint.
And here was me thinking it was the fouth official he abused in order to try and get the decision referred to the TMO.
The Saints forum made it all up don't yer know!!
The Saints forums are very quiet on the issue, it would seem it's the club, not their fans who have an axe to grind, or are they just trying to deflect the hostility away from their own cynical behaviour?
"If you want entertainment, go to the theatre," says Edinburgh head coach Richard Cockerill. "Rugby players play the game to win.15/1/21.
Crumblies wrote:
Hmm It would appear that may be he didn't ask quite so politely, maybe he did upset someone and has in fact been reported for his behaviour and things which he said.
Still it's all a major conspiracy by everyone to besmirch our fine leader eh TigerBurnie?
Yep and we can see right through you
"If you want entertainment, go to the theatre," says Edinburgh head coach Richard Cockerill. "Rugby players play the game to win.15/1/21.
tigerburnie wrote: it would seem it's the club, not their fans who have an axe to grind, or are they just trying to deflect the hostility away from their own cynical behaviour?
tigerburnie wrote: it would seem it's the club, not their fans who have an axe to grind, or are they just trying to deflect the hostility away from their own cynical behaviour?
Your evidence for this?
Their forum is very volatile.
And managements hand is seen where?
You are, with respect,just making it up!
There is no specific evidence that the RFU charge has come because of complaints made by Northampton Saints/angry fan letters etc. However, it has been reported that Saints have complained about Cockerill's alleged behaviour. The amount of time that has elapsed between the final and the charge would suggest that this has arisen because of pressure on the RFU, since if Cockerill had done anything particularly offensive, you would think that the 4th official and Ed Morrison would have made a complaint pretty quickly. Whether that pressure has come from Saints, the media, letters from supporters or complaints from people watching the final remains to be seen.
If Cockerill has behaved inappropriately and/or in a way that is not within the laws of the game, then he should be punished accordingly and will hopefully learn his lesson. However, the timing of this announcement makes it all look a bit suspicious.
No doubt someone can advise me, but since there is a time limit for citings, I would have thought this kind of thing would also have a time limit after the game? If it doesn't, should it not have one?
Don't waste your time away thinking about yesterday's blues
Demelza - another Mother
No doubt someone can advise me, but since there is a time limit for citings, I would have thought this kind of thing would also have a time limit after the game? If it doesn't, should it not have one?
Valid point!
I don't know the rules but I feel too long has now passed and too much drivel and biased views have been expressed for it to be a fair hearing!
I would add that as the official didn't make a complaint at the time it would appear that not much was said and possibly outside influence's do have a part to play which is extremely odd!
No doubt someone can advise me, but since there is a time limit for citings, I would have thought this kind of thing would also have a time limit after the game? If it doesn't, should it not have one?
Valid point!
I don't know the rules but I feel too long has now passed and too much drivel and biased views have been expressed for it to be a fair hearing!
I would add that as the official didn't make a complaint at the time it would appear that not much was said and possibly outside influence's do have a part to play which is extremely odd!
Precisely.
However getting back to the thread topic, Martins assesment of the game is about the only words I've seen written about the rugby and our fine win and record in this competition. The rest of the gutter press just seem hell bent on muck raking and trying to create a story out of nothing. The game is the loser and the red card and now this subsequent charge, have been blown out of proportion by the press.Northamptons cynical manoeverings look they are suceeding in deflecting everyones attention away from the tactics they employed taking out our captain. There's an injured player and nothing much has been written about that.
"If you want entertainment, go to the theatre," says Edinburgh head coach Richard Cockerill. "Rugby players play the game to win.15/1/21.
youngtiger states
'jgriffin, I love the hypocrisy that your pretty much swore in a post where you berate and criticise a coach for doing so in a high-stress situation.'
Pu-leaze stop being so high and mighty. The word I used was an often used colloquialism for defecation and it was hyphenated with the word 'storm', in the same way it is often linked to the word 'house'.
Apparently the swear-filter (American Baptist version?)identifies it as such.
And I do not criticise Cockers, as I have noted that the same borderline-illegal tactics were used to take out Charlie Hodgson in the semi, and many have noted that Cockers was absolutely correct to ask why the laws were not being implemented.
Please also adjust your humour filter re tigerburnie and his 'leader' comment.
This thread is becoming a slagfest.
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.
