Citing for Owen Williams

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Rizzo, Tigerbeat, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

Post Reply
G.K
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5787
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 10:19 am
Location: See SatNav

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by G.K » Wed May 28, 2014 7:32 am

Just read the transcript. Very poor in my opinion, almost amateurish in it's analysis and judgement I'd say and includes at least one spelling mistake.
Nowadays referees decide matches, players by how much.

Phil B
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2093
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 10:49 am
Location: St Julien Les Rosiers, Le Gard.

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by Phil B » Wed May 28, 2014 7:48 am

I find it ridiculous that he could be cited without an allegation, given the difficulty people have in locating the incident. Does the citing officer have Xray eyes, looking into every ruck and maul for stray fingers?

I find it equally ridiculous that it doesn't matter whether it is intentional or not. If a player , in clearing out at the ruck, for example, intentionally or otherwise pushes the hand of his opponent into the face of another, then the very idea that that player could be cited, is ridiculous is it not?

So surely there has to be intent?

But from what cleverer people than me are saying, the answer is no.
I could agree with you...but then we'd both be wrong.

Soggypitch
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2000
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:18 pm
Location: Market Harborough

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by Soggypitch » Wed May 28, 2014 8:39 am

Feel very sorry for Williams, he is not a dirty player and very obviously this was an accidental contact with the eye area.

The length of ban is ludicrous and the rugby authorities need to get together and sort out these issues sooner rather than later. Another being yellow cards for so called tip tackles (eg Bowden in the semi and many others this season). What starts out as well intentioned "legislation" to prevent O'Driscoll like scenarios in NZ, instead goes completely OTT and as a result the game/refs start to lose credibility.

Burns will now be in the driving seat for the 10 shirt at the start of the season, as presumably OW will not play in any pre season friendlies.

I hear what people say about pleading guilty because even accidental contact is punishable (why?!), but in my view we shouldn't be pandering to these stupid rules, if it was an accident plead not guilty and fight your corner. The more people/clubs that do that, the sooner the law/protocol will be altered in line with common sense.
Soggypitch

4071
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2702
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:21 am
Location: London

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by 4071 » Wed May 28, 2014 8:44 am

Well, that wasn't a great 60 seconds for young Williams. Comes on, commits an invisible offence that leads to a 6-week ban and then misses a basic tackle to let North in for a try.

sapajo
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4700
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by sapajo » Wed May 28, 2014 10:00 am

Soggypitch wrote:
Burns will now be in the driving seat for the 10 shirt at the start of the season, as presumably OW will not play in any pre season friendlies.
Guess thatdepends upon when the six weeks runs from and the dates of any pre season friendlies?
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity

MarkyH
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 7:57 am
Location: Stoney Stanton

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by MarkyH » Wed May 28, 2014 10:30 am

G.K wrote:Just read the transcript. Very poor in my opinion, almost amateurish in it's analysis and judgement I'd say and includes at least one spelling mistake.
Has anyone got a link for the transcript please - hunted through the judgements on the RFU site but can't find it anywhere.

sapajo
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4700
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by sapajo » Wed May 28, 2014 10:32 am

Six week ban from date of hearing free to play from September 2nd :smt017
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity

G.K
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5787
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 10:19 am
Location: See SatNav

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by G.K » Wed May 28, 2014 10:44 am

MarkyH wrote:
G.K wrote:Just read the transcript. Very poor in my opinion, almost amateurish in it's analysis and judgement I'd say and includes at least one spelling mistake.
Has anyone got a link for the transcript please - hunted through the judgements on the RFU site but can't find it anywhere.
The transcript I was referring to was the one for the Saints prop flooring TY. Not seen the one for Owen, I don't think the RFU have published it yet.
Nowadays referees decide matches, players by how much.

MarkyH
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 7:57 am
Location: Stoney Stanton

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by MarkyH » Wed May 28, 2014 10:45 am

That explains it! Thanks for clearing that up, GK.

1966
Top Cat
Top Cat
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:14 pm

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by 1966 » Wed May 28, 2014 12:31 pm

If Williams was cited without any evidence why wasn't Hartley for allegedly biting?

sapajo
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4700
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by sapajo » Wed May 28, 2014 12:36 pm

1966 wrote:If Williams was cited without any evidence why wasn't Hartley for allegedly biting?
All hear say at the moment but I wonder what would have been the outcome if Burrell had tweeted to Owen Williams as Tom Youngs did to Ma'afu?
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity

Farmboy
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 11:03 am

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by Farmboy » Wed May 28, 2014 1:04 pm

Looking at it again Willaims seems to open palm push Burrell in the face after the ball has gone while trying to leave the ruck

snoopster
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 302
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 1:58 pm

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by snoopster » Wed May 28, 2014 1:09 pm

1966 wrote:If Williams was cited without any evidence why wasn't Hartley for allegedly biting?
I'm waiting until I see the transcript of the case before judging the correctness of the decision, it could be there is evidence that hasn't been seen in public.

Christophelp
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 2:00 pm

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by Christophelp » Wed May 28, 2014 2:24 pm

Soggypitch wrote:The length of ban is ludicrous and the rugby authorities need to get together and sort out these issues sooner rather than later. Another being yellow cards for so called tip tackles (eg Bowden in the semi and many others this season). What starts out as well intentioned "legislation" to prevent O'Driscoll like scenarios in NZ, instead goes completely OTT and as a result the game/refs start to lose credibility.

I hear what people say about pleading guilty because even accidental contact is punishable (why?!), but in my view we shouldn't be pandering to these stupid rules, if it was an accident plead not guilty and fight your corner. The more people/clubs that do that, the sooner the law/protocol will be altered in line with common sense.
Well, the length of the ban comes directly from the entry points within the disciplinary code.

The low entry point for 'illegal contact with the eye or eye area of an opponent' is 12 weeks. Presumably the lowest entry point is set so high because the eyes are a significant and precious organ of the body that are very difficult to protect and impossible to replace. The various entry points are there as a deterrant (i.e. the eyes are a no go area, do not touch them).

Williams has received the minimum ban possible for such an offence (lowest entry point, 12 weeks, maximum reduction of 50%) which implies that it was accidental and was seen as being so by the hearing (presumably this will be confirmed in due course when the RFU publish the report).

I have concerns about the 50% reduction available in general - it means that in cases where there is a reasonable chance of being found guilty of the offence, a player may plead guilty anyway, so as to receive the minimum ban; as opposed to pleading not guilty and contesting the charge, which if still found guilty would likely get a 9-12 week ban (in this case).

The process does smell of 'let's get this wrapped up quickly so we can all go home' rather than, 'let's fully consider whether the player is guilty or not guilty and then consider whether his actions were deliberate or not'. But then a citing only occurs when the citing officer feels there is a case to answer.

Of course that's not to say that we thought he was not guilty but told/advised him to plead guilty or that we thought/he admitted that he was guilty.

This doesn't tell us whether we (Tigers) think he was guilty or not guilty and the 50% reduction available does make you think that players will plead guilty to receive a much reduced ban rather than contest a charge. If they think there is a reasonable chance of being found guilty anyway

AidanMcDowell
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:25 pm
Location: Kent

Re: Citing for Owen Williams

Post by AidanMcDowell » Wed May 28, 2014 3:30 pm

No doubt there's an obvious answer to this question but it's just not occurring to me at the moment...how does a 6 week ban take him to 2 September? If it's only in effect during weeks when there are actually eligible matches being played, did this also apply last year to Hartley?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DonnyTiger, sam16111986, Shortbloke66, tigercub21, TigerFeetSteve and 2 guests