Tom Youngs Verdict

[MCC1964]

I’m stunned, but perhaps I ought not to be surprised. What a cop out.

[Scott1]

Not surprised one bit! Absolute joke!

[JP14]

Not even a slap on the wrist!

I wouldn’t be too annoyed though, we all knew this was coming and if you think about it, Bristol have already got their punishment on the pitch.

[Noggs]

SB's call was absolutely correct. Lam lied and tried to pull a fast one changing his mind only after Tempest reminded him they would go down to 13 men with uncontested scrums and Tigers winning the ball.

It is a sad day when the RFU hasn't got the necessaries to stand up and deal with the matter

[Broadstaff]

Nice of Tom to apologise to Ian Tempest and to acknowledge his comments were "heat of the moment". I hope some on social media, who wrote in the heat of the moment about the officiating, will do the same, at least in their own minds! That the business with Lam and the team manager is deemed over, with not even a statement, is unsatisfactory.

[Crofty]

Apology and the case was closed as per Tempest.

The RFU are pathetic!!

No, they’re only pathetic if they take no action against Pat Lam.

They took action re: Pat Lam, they gave him a :censored: award! The RFU are a bunch of useless stuffed shirts who have it in for us and are the worst perpetrators of actions prejudicial to the interests of the game.

[wormus]

It sounds like the RFU made a very unusual decision in this case and even to praising the Tigers QC for his submission.
The reasoning behind the judgement is well thought out and I hope Tom and the game will benefit.
There is no reference to the Lam incident in this judgement, but for those interested it is well worth a read.
~ https://www.englandrugby.com/dxdam/be/b ... tJun21.pdf

[Bunchy]

I do have a bit of sympathy here for the judgement - hear me out !!
* Ref TY - he did swear at the official and that's wrong - so he was right to be punished - we cant have that creeping into the game.
* Regarding PL - we all know it was a bit of a game. But, as I understand it, the facts are that the player was listed as tactical and in the end went back on as if that were the case.
now, we know it was PL not knowing the rules and thinking uncontested scrums would be better for his team that caused the injury claim - when he realised it would mean losing another defender out wide, he accepted that Afoa should return.
I guess in the end, a tactical substitution returned to the game as per the rules.
regardless of the other bits of noise, no rules were broken..

just my view....

[Tigerbeat]

I do have a bit of sympathy here for the judgement - hear me out !!
* Ref TY - he did swear at the official and that's wrong - so he was right to be punished - we cant have that creeping into the game.
* Regarding PL - we all know it was a bit of a game. But, as I understand it, the facts are that the player was listed as tactical and in the end went back on as if that were the case.
now, we know it was PL not knowing the rules and thinking uncontested scrums would be better for his team that caused the injury claim - when he realised it would mean losing another defender out wide, he accepted that Afoa should return.
I guess in the end, a tactical substitution returned to the game as per the rules.
regardless of the other bits of noise, no rules were broken..

just my view....

At no time did Pat Lam use any abusive language too.

[JP14]

I do have a bit of sympathy here for the judgement - hear me out !!
* Ref TY - he did swear at the official and that's wrong - so he was right to be punished - we cant have that creeping into the game.
* Regarding PL - we all know it was a bit of a game. But, as I understand it, the facts are that the player was listed as tactical and in the end went back on as if that were the case.
now, we know it was PL not knowing the rules and thinking uncontested scrums would be better for his team that caused the injury claim - when he realised it would mean losing another defender out wide, he accepted that Afoa should return.
I guess in the end, a tactical substitution returned to the game as per the rules.
regardless of the other bits of noise, no rules were broken..

just my view....

At no time did Pat Lam use any abusive language too.

To suggest that a referee would be responsible for Afoa's injury was not on though, was it?

[chris111]

It sounds like the RFU made a very unusual decision in this case and even to praising the Tigers QC for his submission.
The reasoning behind the judgement is well thought out and I hope Tom and the game will benefit.
There is no reference to the Lam incident in this judgement, but for those interested it is well worth a read.
~ https://www.englandrugby.com/dxdam/be/b ... tJun21.pdf

As a general rule I’d suggest we shall all take the time to read the full transcript of disciplinary hearings before commenting, rather than pontificating based on what we saw of the incident.

Maybe all forum users could agree to do this - no doubt we’ll still manage to argue about the outcome, but at least it will be a fully informed argument!

[SthrnTiger]

I do have a bit of sympathy here for the judgement - hear me out !!
* Ref TY - he did swear at the official and that's wrong - so he was right to be punished - we cant have that creeping into the game.
* Regarding PL - we all know it was a bit of a game. But, as I understand it, the facts are that the player was listed as tactical and in the end went back on as if that were the case.
now, we know it was PL not knowing the rules and thinking uncontested scrums would be better for his team that caused the injury claim - when he realised it would mean losing another defender out wide, he accepted that Afoa should return.
I guess in the end, a tactical substitution returned to the game as per the rules.
regardless of the other bits of noise, no rules were broken..

just my view....

At no time did Pat Lam use any abusive language too.

To suggest that a referee would be responsible for Afoa's injury was not on though, was it?

For me that’s the thing Pat Lam did that should get punished. I would say that’s much worse then swearing at a Ref, he was essentially trying to blackmail tempest.

Imagine if Tom Youngs had said to Tempest - if you don’t give a penalty try now and I get injured on the next scrum it’s your fault.

[Pellsey]

Similar to what somebody posted then deleted, I believe that cheating is far worse than a couple of dubious words stating truths to a sir who bottled it IMHO. OTY should not have done it though (in the modern, not allowed to tell the truth or at least give opinions kind of way.)

I very much enjoyed Bristol losing though at the weekend. That works for me as punishment. At least it make me chuckle.

[Scott1]

Similar to what somebody posted then deleted, I believe that cheating is far worse than a couple of dubious words stating truths to a sir who bottled it IMHO. OTY should not have done it though (in the modern, not allowed to tell the truth or at least give opinions kind of way.)

I very much enjoyed Bristol losing though at the weekend. That works for me as punishment. At least it make me chuckle.

I said that,has it been deleted?! Not by me

[Pellsey]

Similar to what somebody posted then deleted, I believe that cheating is far worse than a couple of dubious words stating truths to a sir who bottled it IMHO. OTY should not have done it though (in the modern, not allowed to tell the truth or at least give opinions kind of way.)

I very much enjoyed Bristol losing though at the weekend. That works for me as punishment. At least it make me chuckle.

I said that,has it been deleted?! Not by me

You are obviously not allowed to give opinions like that any more!