Corry banned for 6 weeks

[Dave J]

Breaking news on Sky that he has been found not guilty of gouging but guilty of conduct unbecomming, or words to that effect. Could have been worse although I was hoping for no more tha 4 weeks.

[salcombe bob]

I'm sure Hibbard was squeaking clean Why we don't shut the bridge and ignore these Welshies I don't know, we always have a problem when we go there!!!!

[woutster]

http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/12_12324.php

before someone asks for it!

[welshy3]

So he made contact with the eye but this was unintentional? Didn't someone get 18 weeks for that recently?

[Bill W]

He must appeal!!!

Unintentional!! Not striking!!

Not in line with 6N ruling!!!

Ospreys management condemned as lying cheating offspring out of wedlock.

Let the silks gather!!!

And IRB whatever you come up with it better be good!!

You have allowed Ospreys to bring the game into disrepute!!

[Gate]

So... Didn't "strike" him. Made contact with the eye area accidentally. Which is to say he didn't intend to make contact with the eye area. How on earth can that be a red cardable offence so as to be citable in the first place, let alone worth six weeks?

Crazy. If they don't appeal, I'll be amazed.

And if this gets reported as "gouging", it needs to be corrected every time anyone uses that time, sharpish.

And if any sanctimonious "argue for the sake of it" type tries to run the argument that this is a really serious offence because someone could lose his sight, and Corry was lucky, because look at the entry points, etc. etc., I shall simply respond with

God, I'm angry.

[Bill W]

I am furious!!!

[welshy3]

Unbelievable that they can say what is intentional or not..have you seen the video? Would have thought that his intention was beyond doubt..and the only question was whether he attacked his eyes or not.

Unbelievable.

[Gate]

And what, pray, is that post supposed to mean?

[tigermad]

So... Didn't "strike" him. Made contact with the eye area accidentally. Which is to say he didn't intend to make contact with the eye area. How on earth can that be a red cardable offence so as to be citable in the first place, let alone worth six weeks?

Crazy. If they don't appeal, I'll be amazed.

And if this gets reported as "gouging", it needs to be corrected every time anyone uses that time, sharpish.

And if any sanctimonious "argue for the sake of it" type tries to run the argument that this is a really serious offence because someone could lose his sight, and Corry was lucky, because look at the entry points, etc. etc., I shall simply respond with

God, I'm angry.

I echo the sentiments of Gate and I for one would be very surprised if Martin Corry and Leicester do not appeal this decision.

[Snorbins]

Unintentional must be accidental! Again the citing panel are playing with words to justify their existence.

The cheese and port must have been substandard!!!!!!

[tigerfeet13]

A farce and a shambles!

Ospreys, and the ERC hang your heads in shame!!

[Will S]

If every "accident" is punishable by a 6 week ban we are not going to have many players knocking around in the GP - might have to change the format to 7's! Are players suppose to hit rucks now with their hands behind their back??

[yo_soy]

If he wasn't trying to strike him or stick his fingers in Hibbard's eyes, just what was he trying to do? Someone explain, please.

You don't get 6 weeks

[Bill W]

He just has!!!