Ryan Wilson gets off?

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

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

Chobbsy
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2729
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:51 am
Location: Milton Keynes

Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by Chobbsy » Thu Mar 01, 2018 4:30 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43229591
Wow to me on the play back there was a definite attempt to rake across the eye, before anyone starts the abuse, that is just MY opinion
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/

Stephen18
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 8:51 am

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by Stephen18 » Thu Mar 01, 2018 4:49 pm

Chobbsy wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 4:30 pm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43229591
Wow to me on the play back there was a definite attempt to rake across the eye, before anyone starts the abuse, that is just MY opinion
Although it true he makes contact with the eye, i dont think his trying to rake the eyes, just trying to get a 20stone bloke off him who had him by the throat. I think to be honest both should have been cited, you cant coak people on a rugby pitch. So you either had to ban them both or neither.

Wayne Richardson Fan Club
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2540
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:53 am
Location: Barrowford, near the Witches

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by Wayne Richardson Fan Club » Thu Mar 01, 2018 4:57 pm

Nigel asked them if there was a problem, they both said no, that should if been end of it.
The citing should of been both or neither, dealt with on field of play, pretty sure if Hughes thought he had been gouged he would of said something.
Its almost as if the citing officer was trying to justify their existence.
To win is not as important as playing with style!

Flash
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 215
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 1:45 pm

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by Flash » Thu Mar 01, 2018 5:48 pm

Pretty sure Ashton got banned for less.

JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6843
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Burbage

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by JP14 » Thu Mar 01, 2018 6:12 pm

Flash wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 5:48 pm
Pretty sure Ashton got banned for less.
damnnnnnn
"Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Failing, But In Rising Every Time We Fall" Confucius

sam16111986
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4466
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 6:27 pm
Location: Shepshed

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by sam16111986 » Thu Mar 01, 2018 7:10 pm

It's an odd decision as it's completely at odds with any other citing commisson ruling in recent years. Some players have copped bans for reckless contact with eye area for an awful lot less.

strawclearer
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4077
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:13 am

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by strawclearer » Thu Mar 01, 2018 7:28 pm

sam16111986 wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 7:10 pm
It's an odd decision as it's completely at odds with any other citing commisson ruling in recent years. Some players have copped bans for reckless contact with eye area for an awful lot less.
I'm not sure the citing process could be accused of consistency or common sense.
Happy days clearing straw from the pitch before the Baa-Baas games! KBO
Wear a Mask>Protect The NHS>Save Lives

johnthegriff
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1412
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 12:37 am

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by johnthegriff » Thu Mar 01, 2018 8:01 pm

There is absolute consistency, Celtic league players innocent or lesser sentences despite the evidence, English or French players guilty with hefty sentences even if there is no evidence. Remember Cozza being banned after Julian White had been accused, when they realised it could not possibly have been Jules unless he had arms like Mr Tickle they decided it must have been Martin Correy even though there was no evidence of any hands coming into contact with an Osprey's eye.

biffer
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1568
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 4:35 pm

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by biffer » Thu Mar 01, 2018 8:05 pm

johnthegriff wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 8:01 pm
There is absolute consistency, Celtic league players innocent or lesser sentences despite the evidence, English or French players guilty with hefty sentences even if there is no evidence. Remember Cozza being banned after Julian White had been accused, when they realised it could not possibly have been Jules unless he had arms like Mr Tickle they decided it must have been Martin Correy even though there was no evidence of any hands coming into contact with an Osprey's eye.
Well that’s one of the biggest pieces of nonsense I’ve read in a while.

sam16111986
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4466
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 6:27 pm
Location: Shepshed

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by sam16111986 » Thu Mar 01, 2018 8:10 pm

strawclearer wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 7:28 pm
sam16111986 wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 7:10 pm
It's an odd decision as it's completely at odds with any other citing commisson ruling in recent years. Some players have copped bans for reckless contact with eye area for an awful lot less.
I'm not sure the citing process could be accused of consistency or common sense.
Fair point.

johnthegriff
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1412
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 12:37 am

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by johnthegriff » Thu Mar 01, 2018 9:08 pm

Biffer it might be nonsense but it is my opinion. The facts are there, Perpignan hooker no evidence but eighteen weeks ban, incidentally accused by the same Ospreys player who accused Julian White then changed his mind to Martin Corry, Mickey Youngs (I think it was) accused by an Ulster player, no evidence and the accuser couldn't even be bothered to turn up at the tribunal and changed his written statement but an eight week ban. Julian Dupuy 21 weeks for a blatant gouging, a fair enough sentence but Quinlan for just as bad an offence got 11 weeks.
This disparity in the sentencing was possibly a factor in club rugby wanting to end ERC's administration of the European Cup and move its base away from Ireland.

wormus
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1407
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 8:23 pm
Location: "The Home of the Game!"

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by wormus » Thu Mar 01, 2018 11:18 pm

sam16111986 wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 7:10 pm
It's an odd decision as it's completely at odds with any other citing commisson ruling in recent years. Some players have copped bans for reckless contact with eye area for an awful lot less.
Yes Owen Williams came off the bench and was promptly accused of eye gouging against Saints, I think it was Burrell totally inconsistent as Tom Youngs had disregarded a Saints offence earlier.

Tiger_in_Birmingham
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1743
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:55 pm
Location: Birmingham / Bangor Uni

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by Tiger_in_Birmingham » Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:37 am

I'm astounded that he wasn't found guilty. I don't think there was any intent or malice to specifically go for the eyes, he was only looking to try and get the man off him, but there was clearly contact with the eye area. The panel sais that eye contact was made however due to Wilson's strapped fingers he didn't have control and that 'it was reckless'. Isn't reckless contact with the eye area exactly what other people have been suspended for?

As for some of the other posts - Corry was clearly doing something to wind Hibbard up, IMO he was looking for a reaction so that Hibbard would swing for him and get carded, as it was Hibbard just about kept his cool. As for naming Julian that wasn't any of the players, that was Jiffy when walking into the changing room and being told about the contact with the eyes he said White's name without being told anything about who it might have been.

Williams got done for reckless contact when he tried to do a croc roll (when they were allowed around the neck) and his hand slipped up and over the face including the eyes. Rambo got cited and suspended for catching the head/eyes when trying to jackal the ball.

In my opinion Wilson should have received 1 week - guilty plea, mitigating circumstances etc but still made contact with the eyes. Making it 1 week would mean he wouldn't miss any games so would show that the system isn't too lenient but recognises that this instance was the most minimal of occurrances.

mightymouse
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3077
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:30 pm

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by mightymouse » Fri Mar 02, 2018 10:08 am

Whether or not other people have been wrongly sentenced he should not have been. If you look back at the footage from the start Hughes deliberately lies on him preventing him getting up from the previous breakdown then he pushes a hand it his chest. Wilson retaliates in an odd way by wrapping his legs around Hughes. Hughes further escalates it by grabbing him by the throat and trusting downwards then stands up with continued pressure on his throat. Wilson reacts as any human being would by trying to push him off flailing desperately at his face. He did not contact his eyes.

Personally I have always felt that when someone is sent off or sin binned for retaliation then the original perpetrator should get at least equal punishment otherwise you are rewarding the wind up merchants and asking them to continue their nefarious ways.

In this instance Owens was very sensible about the way he dealt with it and although it was correctly looked at by the citing officers they also have made the sensible decision.

The only thing I would add to that is that the officials should send in writing, so that it is recorded, a letter to Wilson to say he needs to be careful where he puts his hands in future and a similar letter to hughes to say that this type of antagonistic play will not be tolerated. After a while the real trouble makers will build up a record that can be santioned.
It seems Wilson was being targeted possibly as England had identified him as a hot head likely to react. Farrell started this by the shoving and barging in the tunnel prior to the match hence the flare up there

Tiger_in_Birmingham
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1743
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:55 pm
Location: Birmingham / Bangor Uni

Re: Ryan Wilson gets off?

Post by Tiger_in_Birmingham » Fri Mar 02, 2018 10:31 am

mightymouse wrote:
Fri Mar 02, 2018 10:08 am
Whether or not other people have been wrongly sentenced he should not have been. If you look back at the footage from the start Hughes deliberately lies on him preventing him getting up from the previous breakdown then he pushes a hand it his chest. Wilson retaliates in an odd way by wrapping his legs around Hughes. Hughes further escalates it by grabbing him by the throat and trusting downwards then stands up with continued pressure on his throat. Wilson reacts as any human being would by trying to push him off flailing desperately at his face. He did not contact his eyes.
As per the findings of the panel Wilson did make contact with the eye area, they even clarified that it was reckless and not intentional. I'm not sure how they then went on to find that this didn't fall foul of law 9.12 nor Regulaton 17 as numerous other players have done exactly the same thing (no malice nor intent) yet they got suspended.

Once again the citing process is shown to be random and not evidence based.

mightymouse wrote:
Fri Mar 02, 2018 10:08 am
Personally I have always felt that when someone is sent off or sin binned for retaliation then the original perpetrator should get at least equal punishment otherwise you are rewarding the wind up merchants and asking them to continue their nefarious ways.
Retaliation has always been dealt with more severely than the original infringement. Referees have been mandated to start looking at some of the niggle - e.g. taking men out beyond the ruck, pulling them in when they're the first defender

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests