Gouging

[G.K]

Sorry I'm lost, what's that got to do with it? Are you saying all Englishmen are liers / cheaters?

And Argentinians also. If they were such liers/cheaters as ZSF suggests they would use that tactic on a regular basis, they don't. There is no smoke without fire and ZSF - it would seem you are defending the indefensible.

[Ze Stade Fan]

Some of the Stade fans being fairly revolting on Twitter towards Dan and out Club.

Here a novel approach don't touch the eyes majority of rugby players manage to do it.

And there will be more evidence on it in the hearing.

Well, we'll see about that. That should not deter us from enjoying a mouth watering quarter final in one of England's best stadium.

[Big Dai]

Hm. Er. I have to express my perplexity here.

What evidence is being brought to condemn my compatriots? So far I have seen one still picture which wouldn't stand long in front of a court (as in civil justice).

Other than this are the evidence brought by Marco Ayerza and Dan Cole. These are the other party, a party we will play in a few weeks, they cannot be counted as evidence, can they?

I also read lots of posts of this forum, saying that if they are French they must be guilty. Let's see in detail. I don't want to sound biased being French meself and proudly so, but French rugby was terribly violent in a near past. Jacques Verdier, an editor of the only rugby paper in France admits to this in his nostalgic books. At University level, I have seen my beloved Sciences Po team doing things that would bring you to jail if done outside the pitch. If you want to see how it was in fact, youtube "quart de finale 1991 - Toulon Bordeaux-Bègles" the video is kinda blurred but you have a sample of how it was.

I talked to the elders of the old gang that gathers at training sessions this week and they admitted it, but immediately added: those things were sorted out amongst men. I.e.: such shameful acts as would probably send you home on a stretcher. Ondarts, Imbernon, Garruet and th elikes never called in for a commissioner.

But you also have to acknowledged that, at professional level, this has virtually disappeared. Laporte (a sane man now lost to madness) used to shout "no fouls" in the dressing room and that was heard. Professional era changed the behaviours : you don't play for your village anymore, this is heard in stadiae every weekend.

And the French consider as hypocrisy or worse to cite someone without video evidence. Such was the Attoub case : one blown-up picture leading to a 72-week ban. Cueto : 8 weeks, with a visible finger-in-eye offence.

Other strange thing to a Frenchman, once cited you have no choice but to plead guilty. Granted that you can't prove a negative, what choice have you left?

Anyway, I hope Paul, a good kid by all possible recognition - he was born in Paris - gets a minor sentence for something that was probably done without even knowing. I hope Sempéré gets nothing at all because I made meself sick watching the game time and again and no, there is not a single proof of Sempéré's misdoing.

Now let's play this quarter final, I hope I'll make enough money to come to the magnificent Welford Rd Stadium and may the best team that day win !

honi soit qui mal y pense? I think not. You yourself wrote a little ditty to us all claiming the French will hold us down and gouge our eyes...........I've tried to find it......but failed.

The French do gouge, wind up, get techy. Morgan Para is an actress who trys to con the ref by deliberately running into the opposition after a kick. Julien...le petit numero neuf.......sticks his fingers in the eyes of the opposition. If only we could have found the much vaunted "Morceau de fluff d'Oadby" to keep him here, but alas his other half wanted him in France and he obeyed. Another French weakness, women!

But for all that I love the games against the French! I can shout "Cheat" and "Get up you little diver!" at the television, whilst supping my Frontonnais and maybe the odd cognac.

But the wind up merchants have to be sorted......from anywhere.
It's supposed to be a noble game..........so keep the fingers out of the eyes and the only ball that needs handling has four panels.

[Ze Stade Fan]

Hm. Er. I have to express my perplexity here.

What evidence is being brought to condemn my compatriots? So far I have seen one still picture which wouldn't stand long in front of a court (as in civil justice).

Other than this are the evidence brought by Marco Ayerza and Dan Cole. These are the other party, a party we will play in a few weeks, they cannot be counted as evidence, can they?

I also read lots of posts of this forum, saying that if they are French they must be guilty. Let's see in detail. I don't want to sound biased being French meself and proudly so, but French rugby was terribly violent in a near past. Jacques Verdier, an editor of the only rugby paper in France admits to this in his nostalgic books. At University level, I have seen my beloved Sciences Po team doing things that would bring you to jail if done outside the pitch. If you want to see how it was in fact, youtube "quart de finale 1991 - Toulon Bordeaux-Bègles" the video is kinda blurred but you have a sample of how it was.

I talked to the elders of the old gang that gathers at training sessions this week and they admitted it, but immediately added: those things were sorted out amongst men. I.e.: such shameful acts as would probably send you home on a stretcher. Ondarts, Imbernon, Garruet and th elikes never called in for a commissioner.

But you also have to acknowledged that, at professional level, this has virtually disappeared. Laporte (a sane man now lost to madness) used to shout "no fouls" in the dressing room and that was heard. Professional era changed the behaviours : you don't play for your village anymore, this is heard in stadiae every weekend.

And the French consider as hypocrisy or worse to cite someone without video evidence. Such was the Attoub case : one blown-up picture leading to a 72-week ban. Cueto : 8 weeks, with a visible finger-in-eye offence.

Other strange thing to a Frenchman, once cited you have no choice but to plead guilty. Granted that you can't prove a negative, what choice have you left?

Anyway, I hope Paul, a good kid by all possible recognition - he was born in Paris - gets a minor sentence for something that was probably done without even knowing. I hope Sempéré gets nothing at all because I made meself sick watching the game time and again and no, there is not a single proof of Sempéré's misdoing.

Now let's play this quarter final, I hope I'll make enough money to come to the magnificent Welford Rd Stadium and may the best team that day win !

honi soit qui mal y pense? I think not. You yourself wrote a little ditty to us all claiming the French will hold us down and gouge our eyes...........I've tried to find it......but failed.

The French do gouge, wind up, get techy. Morgan Para is an actress who trys to con the ref by deliberately running into the opposition after a kick. Julien...le petit numero neuf.......sticks his fingers in the eyes of the opposition. If only we could have found the much vaunted "Morceau de fluff d'Oadby" to keep him here, but alas his other half wanted him in France and he obeyed. Another French weakness, women!

But for all that I love the games against the French! I can shout "Cheat" and "Get up you little diver!" at the television, whilst supping my Frontonnais and maybe the odd cognac.

But the wind up merchants have to be sorted......from anywhere.
It's supposed to be a noble game..........so keep the fingers out of the eyes and the only ball that needs handling has four panels.

I have to admit you're right when it comes to Morgan Parra !

Well, let us wait until the devious, biased, prejudiced jury render their hateful conclusion against the poor innocent Laurents (Sempéré and Gabrillagues) !

Oh, while I am here: a fair lot of Tigers supporters went for pints at the Green Linnet on Staurday night, my friend Eoghan Lucey's pub. Eoghan says they had a ball there and asks me to thank them for their amicable presence in his pub !

[Ze Stade Fan]

That's 15 weeks for Sempéré, 8 for Gabrillagues.

Can't wait for the return leg. Vengeance ! Revenge !

[Ads677]

Fascinating responses on the france bleu website https://www.francebleu.fr/sports/rugby/ ... 1453891022

And I'm sure that Pat Barriscale (presiding) will be delighted to be viewed as part of the British hegemony!

[sapajo]

EPRC official email reads


Paul Gabrillagues suspended for eight weeks
The Stade Francais Paris player, Paul Gabrillagues, has been suspended for eight weeks following an independent Disciplinary Hearing in London today (Wednesday, 27 January 2016).

Gabrillagues was cited by the match Citing Commissioner, Peter Ferguson (Ireland), for allegedly making contact with the eye(s) and/or eye area of the Leicester Tigers prop, Dan Cole (No 3), in the 48th minute of the European Rugby Champions Cup Round 6 match at Stade Jean Bouin on Sunday, 24 January 2016 in contravention of Law 10.4 (m).

Law 10.4 (m) Contact with the eye(s) and/or eye area
Under World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 10.4 (m), Contact with the eye(s) and/or eye area carries the following sanction entry points - Low End: 12 weeks; Mid-Range: 18 weeks; Top End: 24 to 208 weeks.

The independent Judicial Officer, Pat Barriscale (Ireland), heard evidence and submissions from Gabrillagues, who accepted that he committed an act of foul play, from the Stade Francais Paris Chief Executive, Pierre Arnald, and from the EPCR Disciplinary Officer, Liam McTiernan.

In upholding the citing complaint, the Judicial Officer found that Gabrillagues had committed an act of foul play that warranted a red card. He determined that that offence was at the low end of World Rugby's sanctions and selected 12 weeks as the appropriate entry point.

He added two weeks as a deterrent according to World Rugby's memorandum regarding offences of this nature, before reducing the sanction by six weeks – 50% of the entry point - due to Gabrillagues' guilty plea, good disciplinary record, expression of remorse, youth and inexperience and good conduct at the hearing. He then imposed a suspension of eight weeks.

Gabrillagues is free to play on Monday, 21 March 2016. Both the player and EPCR have the right to appeal the decision.

Laurent Sempéré suspended for 15 weeks

The Stade Francais Paris player, Laurent Sempéré, has been suspended for 15 weeks following an independent Disciplinary Hearing in London today (Wednesday, 27 January 2016).

Sempéré was cited by the match Citing Commissioner, Peter Ferguson (Ireland), for allegedly making contact with the eye(s) and/or eye area of the Leicester Tigers prop, Marcos Ayerza (No 1), in the 34th minute of the European Rugby Champions Cup Round 6 match at Stade Jean Bouin on Sunday, 24 January 2016 in contravention of Law 10.4 (m).

Law 10.4 (m) Contact with the eye(s) and/or eye area
Under World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 10.4 (m), Contact with the eye(s) and/or eye area carries the following sanction entry points - Low End: 12 weeks; Mid-Range: 18 weeks; Top End: 24 to 208 weeks.

The independent Judicial Officer, Pat Barriscale (Ireland), heard evidence and submissions from Sempéré, who did not accept that he had committed an act of foul play that warranted a red card, from the Stade Francais Paris Chief Executive, Pierre Arnald, and from the EPCR Disciplinary Officer, Liam McTiernan.

The Judicial Officer also considered written and verbal statements by Ayerza and photographic evidence of abrasions around Ayerza's eye area.

In upholding the citing complaint, the Judicial Officer found that Sempéré had committed an act of foul play that warranted a red card. He determined that the offence was at the mid-range of World Rugby's sanctions and selected 18 weeks as the appropriate entry point.

He added three weeks as a deterrent according to World Rugby's memorandum regarding offences of this nature, before reducing the sanction by six weeks due to Sempéré's good disciplinary record, good character, excellent conduct at the hearing and his expression of concern for Ayerza's welfare.

The Judicial Officer then imposed a suspension of 15 weeks.

Sempéré is free to play on Monday, 9 May 2016. Both the player and EPCR have the right to appeal the decision.

Notes
(i) Citing Commissioner
a) Citing Commissioners are appointed by EPCR for all European Rugby Champions Cup and all televised Challenge Cup matches and shall be entitled to cite a player for any act or acts of Foul Play that in the Citing Commissioner's opinion warranted a red card.
b) For such matches, clubs will not have the power to cite a player but may refer incidents to the Citing Commissioner within 26 hours of the start of the match. c) The Citing Commissioner will have 50 hours from the start of the match to make a citing. In certain circumstances this deadline can be extended.
d) The tournament Disciplinary Officer may forward the submitted citing to a Citing Officer to determine whether there are sufficient grounds for the citing to progress.
e) The Disciplinary Officer will then bring a charge against the cited player.
(ii) Disciplinary Hearing
a) The independent Judicial Officer is chosen by the chairman of the independent Disciplinary Panel, Professor Lorne Crerar.
b) The tournament Disciplinary Officer presents the case against the player.
c) If a citing complaint is upheld, the independent Judicial Officer will be required to consider the appropriate sanction. Under World Rugby's sanctioning regime, which EPCR is obliged to follow, the Judicial Officer will first assess the seriousness of the player's actions and determine which of the three stipulated entry points (lower end, mid range and top end) is the most appropriate.
d) The Judicial Officer will determine the appropriate entry point based on his/her assessment of a number of particular characteristics of the player's actions, including whether or not they were intentional, whether or not they caused any injuries and whether or not they had any effect on the relevant match.
e) After deciding the entry point, the Judicial Officer will then consider whether the suspension should be increased from the entry point to take account of certain specified aggravating factors, such as a poor disciplinary record or the need for deterrence, and/or decreased from the entry point to take account of certain specified mitigating actions, such as a guilty plea, a good disciplinary record, the player's conduct at the hearing and expressions of remorse.
f) A suspension is a blanket ban from playing rugby union anywhere in the world.
g) Both parties to the hearing (EPCR and the player) have the right to appeal decisions of the independent Disciplinary Hearing. Appeals must be lodged within three (3) working days of receiving the full written decision of the Judicial Officer.
h) The full written decision of the Judicial Officer will be available on www.epcrugby.com/disciplinenews when the disciplinary process is complete i) For World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, found at Appendix 1 to World Rugby Regulation 17, please go to www.worldrugby.org

[drc_007]

Is there any sanction against a clearly incompetent ref?

[kingol22]

They really need to stop this rubbish about reducing bans because a player says sorry and behaves at the hearing. Its an absolute joke.

[Bill W (2)]

Is there any sanction against a clearly incompetent ref?

He could be removed from the panel.

The disciplinary hearings ruled he should have issued three red cards.

Did this alter the outcome of the game?

[Bill W (2)]

They really need to stop this rubbish about reducing bans because a player says sorry and behaves at the hearing. Its an absolute joke.

Of itself reducing the sentence for a guilty plea is fair enough.

The amount of the reduction is questionable.

[Grimlish]

Is there any sanction against a clearly incompetent ref?

He could be removed from the panel.

The disciplinary hearings ruled he should have issued three red cards.

Did this alter the outcome of the game?

What's more - if he had issued the first red for gauging he would not have needed to issue the other two. SFP would also have faced a full half down to 14 and likely have had their third try disallowed.

[Bill W (2)]

Is there any sanction against a clearly incompetent ref?

He could be removed from the panel.

The disciplinary hearings ruled he should have issued three red cards.

Did this alter the outcome of the game?

What's more - if he had issued the first red for gauging he would not have needed to issue the other two. SFP would also have faced a full half down to 14 and likely have had their third try disallowed.

Just so!

[TomWeston]

Is there any sanction against a clearly incompetent ref?

He could be removed from the panel.

The disciplinary hearings ruled he should have issued three red cards.

Did this alter the outcome of the game?

What's more - if he had issued the first red for gauging he would not have needed to issue the other two. SFP would also have faced a full half down to 14 and likely have had their third try disallowed.

Why would the useless ref have issued any red cards? According to Remy and the other monocular frogs no offences were committed.

[Bill W (2)]

Why would the useless ref have issued any red cards? According to Remy and the other monocular frogs no offences were committed.

Dusciplinary panel deemed he should have issued red cards,