Did Rougerie gouge McCaw?

First topic message reminder :

Can't recall seeing anything myself although McCaw was acting a little strange near the end of the game. Anything in it?


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10761510

Edit - KRD. Note that while the article imples Dusatoir gouged, evidence posted down-thread suggests that if anyone gouged it was Rougerie so I've amended the title of the thread

Looks like things have progressed since I was last on and the implied version of Dusautoir was actually Rougerie.....unless there was another incident!?!?

Here's the clip anyway so you can make up your own mind:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hneJ8Ws8Yuc

disneychilly wrote:Agree with Biltong. If you know the laws better than the ref, and communicate really well with him, then you have an advantage. It's almost part of the game itself. The ref chats with both teams beforehand anyway, so any concerns would be aired. Playing to the ref's interpretations is part of the game now I'm afraid. I'm sure I'm not alone in wanting this to stop and we need consistency across the board. I have never seen as many games in a Cup affected by refereeing so significantly.

I remember a kid in England I think it was being blinded after having his eyes gouged. Was terrible to watch. Just wanted to ask English Keyboard Warrior, if he was coming in from the side all day do you think he merited being blinded? Sound like you're implying that.

disney, in theory that is how it works, but then we have had recent examples that the practice can be far removed from the theory.

I was more aiming toward the fact that when this does occur the blame is on the referee and not the player.

Couple of things make me rather angry about this topic, the first is that Quinn the journalist chappy can happily go about muddying the good name of a completely innocent party (re. Thierry). I hope he faces legal charges.

Secondly that Rougerie has done this, I've not seen the evidence so I'll not condem him just yet, I was singing his praises post game as he played so brilliantly I can't believe he's stooped so low. I'll be flicking Sky Sports on tonight to have a look at this.

Taylorman wrote:I think the abs didnt want it to ruin the occasion.
Its typical of mccaw and gh and co not wanting to cry foul.
2007 Ab fans went nuts over barnes.
Mccaw and co. wanted no part of the 'crying'

Pure class. Something others fail to comprehend. They set standards- personal or otherwise- that others dream of.
Thats why theyre where they are.
Bleat on all you want...

Nite all.

Can't agree with you there Taylorman. Yesterday I was quite annoyed at the rash blanket attack comments of Quinn (still am) because I could not see any point where Dusatoir looked to be doing anything other than fighting for the ball. Rougerie looked equally innocent at first because what he does to McCaw he does in the first few seconds and then goes back to disrupting the ruck.

But now that the evidence is in, I think it's wrong (not classy) for the ABs not to have pressed charges. It is unfortunately true that this has happened before with French players. As one of the worst things you can do in the game it needs to be stamped out without sympathy or exception. It would be up to the IRB panel to decide whether it was a particularly bad and intentional example of gouging. But if so he should be banned for a lengthy spell. The fact that it was a player as well-known and respected as Rougerie only makes it worse. And the fact that it was one of those unsporting "we've lost the game, let's get some late retribution" incidents makes it worse still.

Yes Quinn was wrong to insinuate TD did the act when he didn´t have the evidence. All he needed to say was that it appeared that something unsavoury happened in the ruck and for then the video evidence to be found.

I agree that gouging needs to be stamped out (no unfortunate pun intended!). He needs to be cited. No one would have accused McCaw (except EW of course) of being an ungracious winner by citing him. Gouging has no place in the game.

I also agree with As... that McCaw should´ve mentioned the efforts of the French team. They were heroic on defence and made it one of the most heart-wrenching, nerve-wracking games I have ever seen.

Leinsterbaby, you're from the NH aren't you? Are you condoning eye gouging, but only on McCaw, because he 'deserves' it? A question, do you recall dussatoir thanking the ABs for what was an epic war of attrition? I dont, and he spoke first after the final whistle. Seems there was no love lost from either side. One thing you'll note when SH teams play each other, is the 'respect' they give each other after a game no matter what (John Smit being an exceptional example). Maybe the respect is not there when NH meets SH, and eye gouges do not help.

EBOP, welcome to the loonybin.

EBOP wrote:Leinsterbaby, you're from the NH aren't you? Are you condoning eye gouging, but only on McCaw, because he 'deserves' it? A question, do you recall dussatoir thanking the ABs for what was an epic war of attrition? I dont, and he spoke first after the final whistle. Seems there was no love lost from either side. One thing you'll note when SH teams play each other, is the 'respect' they give each other after a game no matter what (John Smit being an exceptional example). Maybe the respect is not there when NH meets SH, and eye gouges do not help.

EBOP, that would be equally poor and disappointing

Ha, thanks biltong, full respect for your 'reasoned' arguments and rugby knowledge

I think the aftermath of a world cup final is one place where you can forgive the captains of either team from not having the wherewithal to think of the opposition.

Tis true, greybeard, I can only imagine the emotions that run, but would have been nice to see

EBOP wrote:do you recall dussatoir thanking the ABs for what was an epic war of attrition?

ITV went to an advert break (or back to the studio, one of the two) just as the interview with Dusautoir started.

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:
Can't agree with you there Taylorman. Yesterday I was quite annoyed at the rash blanket attack comments of Quinn (still am) because I could not see any point where Dusatoir looked to be doing anything other than fighting for the ball.

What was disgraceful about Quinn's comments was that he said "it was clearly seen on tv", and then went on to mention dusatoir's name, who had absolutely nothing to do with it.

tomathy wrote:

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:
Can't agree with you there Taylorman. Yesterday I was quite annoyed at the rash blanket attack comments of Quinn (still am) because I could not see any point where Dusatoir looked to be doing anything other than fighting for the ball.

What was disgraceful about Quinn's comments was that he said "it was clearly seen on tv", and then went on to mention dusatoir's name, who had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Agreed Tomathy. Perhaps the original poster SgtPooley can edit Dusatoir's name out of the orginal thread title?

But I presume you also agree that, for the sake of the game, the book should be thrown at Rougerie whether or not the NZ's choose to press charges?

EBOP wrote:Leinsterbaby, you're from the NH aren't you? Are you condoning eye gouging, but only on McCaw, because he 'deserves' it? A question, do you recall dussatoir thanking the ABs for what was an epic war of attrition? I dont, and he spoke first after the final whistle. Seems there was no love lost from either side. One thing you'll note when SH teams play each other, is the 'respect' they give each other after a game no matter what (John Smit being an exceptional example). Maybe the respect is not there when NH meets SH, and eye gouges do not help.

Why do you care where I'm from? All I have seen so far is a fairly low res clip on YouTube where kiwi commentators accuse Rougerie of head butting and gouging. The headbutting looks less dangerous than the famous Mealamu "accidental" headbutt and it is not clear from the video I saw if any gouge occurred. Anyone have a better clip?

These days though a lot of people get excited when gouge is mentioned. Face contact doesn't mean eye gouge. I played rugby for years but never did anything that bad but I understand the frustration players feel when refs repeatedly fail to penalise cheats. It was the cause of a lot of fights and games that get out of control. I have no sympathy for McCaw.

Saw the gouge, it was disgraceful! I really hope the IRB will ban AR for that, who cares about the citing window this type carry on cannot be allowed to go unpunished!

Fair dues to GH and RMcC for not saying anything, I think they just want to enjoy the win. And also to this guy Quinn for highlighting the incident but how can you mistake TD and AR?? Sounds like he had an agenda there, very pathetic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hneJ8Ws8Yuc

See it here, but the footage is poor.

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:

tomathy wrote:

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:
Can't agree with you there Taylorman. Yesterday I was quite annoyed at the rash blanket attack comments of Quinn (still am) because I could not see any point where Dusatoir looked to be doing anything other than fighting for the ball.

What was disgraceful about Quinn's comments was that he said "it was clearly seen on tv", and then went on to mention dusatoir's name, who had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Agreed Tomathy. Perhaps the original poster SgtPooley can edit Dusatoir's name out of the orginal thread title?

But I presume you also agree that, for the sake of the game, the book should be thrown at Rougerie whether or not the NZ's choose to press charges?

Of course.

leinsterbaby wrote:

EBOP wrote:Leinsterbaby, you're from the NH aren't you? Are you condoning eye gouging, but only on McCaw, because he 'deserves' it? A question, do you recall dussatoir thanking the ABs for what was an epic war of attrition? I dont, and he spoke first after the final whistle. Seems there was no love lost from either side. One thing you'll note when SH teams play each other, is the 'respect' they give each other after a game no matter what (John Smit being an exceptional example). Maybe the respect is not there when NH meets SH, and eye gouges do not help.

Why do you care where I'm from? All I have seen so far is a fairly low res clip on YouTube where kiwi commentators accuse Rougerie of head butting and gouging. The headbutting looks less dangerous than the famous Mealamu "accidental" headbutt and it is not clear from the video I saw if any gouge occurred. Anyone have a better clip?

These days though a lot of people get excited when gouge is mentioned. Face contact doesn't mean eye gouge. I played rugby for years but never did anything that bad but I understand the frustration players feel when refs repeatedly fail to penalise cheats. It was the cause of a lot of fights and games that get out of control. I have no sympathy for McCaw.

Oh cmon LB... get a grip. You begin by denying that there definitely was an incident and then finish by more or less admitting that you don't care whether there was or not. And that McCaw somehow deserved it.

There is a difference between sport and "criminal assault". And the two should never be confused or mixed. A game is a game - whether it is a WC final or played by 10 year olds around the corner. Nobody in any game should suffer undue physical assault and injury from someone else who has lost their self-control.

A fellow Leinster supporter.

I'm not comfortable with the fact that McCaw and NZ have not drawn attention to it. Gouging needs to be removed from the game, every single incident should be looked into.

To gloss over it now isn't magnanimous, even if that's their intention. Players need to know this will not be tolerated under any circumstances. It also sends a signal that if you're losing you will be treated more leniently, and only losing teams will complain about foul play.

The ABs camp seems to have a policy of leaving citings to the commissioner - they didn't site Hartley a while back either. To be honest I think they should site if they feel it's warranted.

the-goon wrote:.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hneJ8Ws8Yuc

See it here, but the footage is poor.

Not sure about the head but, but the fingers across the face do look bad. Hopefully a better video can be found, but a heafty ban should be given if as bad as it looks.

Riskysports wrote:

Not sure about the head but, but the fingers across the face do look bad. Hopefully a better video can be found, but a heafty ban should be given if as bad as it looks.

No ban will be given to Rougerie as it's outside of the citing window. Just like no ban was given to Mealamu and Umaga in 2005 when new TV footage was revealed.

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:

leinsterbaby wrote:

EBOP wrote:Leinsterbaby, you're from the NH aren't you? Are you condoning eye gouging, but only on McCaw, because he 'deserves' it? A question, do you recall dussatoir thanking the ABs for what was an epic war of attrition? I dont, and he spoke first after the final whistle. Seems there was no love lost from either side. One thing you'll note when SH teams play each other, is the 'respect' they give each other after a game no matter what (John Smit being an exceptional example). Maybe the respect is not there when NH meets SH, and eye gouges do not help.

Why do you care where I'm from? All I have seen so far is a fairly low res clip on YouTube where kiwi commentators accuse Rougerie of head butting and gouging. The headbutting looks less dangerous than the famous Mealamu "accidental" headbutt and it is not clear from the video I saw if any gouge occurred. Anyone have a better clip?

These days though a lot of people get excited when gouge is mentioned. Face contact doesn't mean eye gouge. I played rugby for years but never did anything that bad but I understand the frustration players feel when refs repeatedly fail to penalise cheats. It was the cause of a lot of fights and games that get out of control. I have no sympathy for McCaw.

Oh cmon LB... get a grip. You begin by denying that there definitely was an incident and then finish by more or less admitting that you don't care whether there was or not. And that McCaw somehow deserved it.

Where did I deny there was definitely an incident? I'm reserving judgement until I see a better clip. All I saw in that clip is a hand going across a face.

England rugby fan wrote:No ban will be given to Rougerie as it's outside of the citing window. Just like no ban was given to Mealamu and Umaga in 2005 when new TV footage was revealed.

You couldn't resist getting that in there, eh mate?

Getting what in ? Just showing the precedent has been set. I.E. No bans are given outside of the citing window.

Geez, I know that. I am ragging you about the example you used.

leinsterbaby wrote:

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:

leinsterbaby wrote:

EBOP wrote:Leinsterbaby, you're from the NH aren't you? Are you condoning eye gouging, but only on McCaw, because he 'deserves' it? A question, do you recall dussatoir thanking the ABs for what was an epic war of attrition? I dont, and he spoke first after the final whistle. Seems there was no love lost from either side. One thing you'll note when SH teams play each other, is the 'respect' they give each other after a game no matter what (John Smit being an exceptional example). Maybe the respect is not there when NH meets SH, and eye gouges do not help.

Why do you care where I'm from? All I have seen so far is a fairly low res clip on YouTube where kiwi commentators accuse Rougerie of head butting and gouging. The headbutting looks less dangerous than the famous Mealamu "accidental" headbutt and it is not clear from the video I saw if any gouge occurred. Anyone have a better clip?

Oh cmon LB... get a grip. You begin by denying that there definitely was an incident and then finish by more or less admitting that you don't care whether there was or not. And that McCaw somehow deserved it.

Where did I deny there was definitely an incident? I'm reserving judgement until I see a better clip. All I saw in that clip is a hand going across a face.

LB you seem to have missed my criticism. As I said you begin by denying that there is adequate video evidence. Now that is fair enough - although it seems to me that there was enough there for me to change my judgement on the matter and you are clealy downplaying its significance. After all, we're not part of any official panel that's going to be actually reprimanding Rougerie are we? But fair enough if you say that we can't judge too harshly by that footage.

But you move from there to say:

leinsterbaby wrote:
These days though a lot of people get excited when gouge is mentioned. Face contact doesn't mean eye gouge. I played rugby for years but never did anything that bad but I understand the frustration players feel when refs repeatedly fail to penalise cheats. It was the cause of a lot of fights and games that get out of control. I have no sympathy for McCaw.

Now none of that is acceptable in the slightest. It doesn't matter what McCaw is doing. You cannot excuse players losing their temper and criminally assaulting other players for the sake of a game. If you were watching your kid playing a game and while he's lying on the ground unable to defend himself and another kid comes up and sticks his finger in his eyes and does permanent damage... would you then say to your son: "ah well, you really shouldn't have been lying offside". Like hell you would.

Has anyone actually seen a proper video clip where you can actually see Rougerie put his finger in McCaws eye. If so can you please post a link.

Jee wizz, this thread couldn't get more tetchy if it turned our Rougerie wasn't French qualified!

We could broaden the participation by suggesting that Rougerie is in fact Alain Rolland's love child?

leinsterbaby wrote:Has anyone actually seen a proper video clip where you can actually see Rougerie put his finger in McCaws eye. If so can you please post a link.

Leinsterbaby, you are walking a fine line trying to get facts and evidence to table. This site works on hearsay* and emphatic generalisations.

*Hearsay being that panel of experts assembled on one of the first pop idol shows

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:We could broaden the participation by suggesting that Rougerie is in fact Alain Rolland's love child?

+1


I also hear that Frenchmen can't look up! That why they couldn't see that Donald missed that penalty chance. FACT (Ficticious, After Comic Timing)

Just remeber the Haskell incident earlier in the torunament. He went off on one to the ref when he got a finger in the eye, but later issued a statements saying he beleived that it wasnt a malaicious gouge having had time to review the evidence and no action was taken.George North put his finger in a fench lads eye in the semi, completly accidental and no malicious intent...never even got a mention in the press.
There is a repuation in french rugby for deliberate gouging. We have seen one clear blatant gouge heavily punished in this tournament. If theres some real evidence form both the players and video then sure throw the book at him. That its Mccaw is irrelvant, he shoudlnt getting gouged. But lets be clear, even if a finger went in the eye that doesnt automaticaly equate to a gouge or a deliberate malicious act.
At the minute this is just press hype as far as im concerned. The NZHerald has a repuation for wild stories and massive all blacks bias. Why hasnt Richie bought it up if it really happened? Is he that much of a gentleman? Surely its in the same catagory as the " did that kick really go over". Neither team seems to think either thing is an issue, just the wild speculaters.

Edit - video has been posted

If we're talking conspiracies, you know that high tackle on a French player that Nigel Owens flagged and Craig Joubert waved away? If you look closely, Nigel actually waved the flag in an anti-clockwise circle, which is official IRB code for 'ignore that, Craig, those French knocked out Wales and I hate them, look you.'

Can you please leave out the criminal assault nonsense. Otherwise McCaw would be in jail for kneeing Parra in the head and Rougerie for doing something not sure what as there is insufficient evidence. It's a rough game that's part of why we love it.

Perhaps the second rows should be charged for sexual assault at scrum time?

If this is going to get dug up, what about that kick,? or what about the knee to the face of Parra?

McCaw didn't make much of it, perhpas he knew it wasn't intentional, or perhaps he thought, well, I have been constantly lying over the ball and on the wrong side etc, who knows.

However, either way, there is no concrete proof and thus far, the only person who needs chastising is the guy who wrote the article!

Yes. Nobody should ever express an opinion on something that is there before them in full colour. You should wait for "experts" to tell you your opinion and then follow that sheepishly and attack anyone that deviates.

If there was no evidence at all... then I'd have some sympathy with your arguments. But there is no law against forming your own judgement on the matter based on the evidence shown so far.

And as for the "criminal assault" thing... what I mean is that it has nothing to do with sport. And cannot be justified in that way. Not that he should be criminally prosecuted. Being over-zealous in a tackle is one thing... but premeditatedly assaulting a player is way outside the box. For me Rougerie has a case to answer. That doesn't mean he's 100% guilty. And it's not a wild allegation. It just means that the evidence so far is pretty damning.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:If we're talking conspiracies, you know that high tackle on a French player that Nigel Owens flagged and Craig Joubert waved away? If you look closely, Nigel actually waved the flag in an anti-clockwise circle, which is official IRB code for 'ignore that, Craig, those French knocked out Wales and I hate them, look you.'

Classic

Topic header updated

There is no actual evidence, there is a clip, of poor quality that seems to show a French player move his hand accross teh face of an All Black player who is lying on teh wrog side of a ruck.

Now having seen a clip fo similar quality that seems to suggest that the kick from Donald missed, which it clearly didnt, I wouldnt be so naive to believe this clip, which is just as inconclusive!

One thing that does appear celar from the clip though, is that it is not Dousotoir doing the 'gouging'

OK having seen the video it does look like he deliberatly raked his fingers across Mccaws eye area.

Mccaw himslef wouldnt have been in a psotion to know whether or not ot was just one of those things.

Cant be certain it was a deliberate gouge but putting on my best mild racism and predjudice hat this sort of thing has a long standing as normal in French rugby. It could well have been everything the journos are getting worked up over. Not exactly the most sustained and brutal assualt ever, but it does look like a deliberate malicious rake to me.

apart from the redness around McCaw's eye?

Or is that imaginary too?

biltongbek wrote:apart from the redness around McCaw's eye?

Or is that imaginary too?

I have played hundreds of games and got plenty of cuts bumps and scratches around my eyes. I was never once gouged. If McCaws eyes were bloodshot then he was gouged.

What a flanker with a red face during a game of rugby, I wonder how that could have happened, since they usually don't have a mark on them

Well something scraped or brushed his eye lid, because it does look red and swollen.

Hardly proof of gouging though?

To try and avoid getting too bogged down in circular arguments here... let's try and describe what we are seeing in that footage.

For me, the damning bit is that Rougerie does not just launch his arms in to the ruck in an effort to get the ball or remove McCaw. He appears to almost delicately move his hand into position (around certain obstacles) and then clearly grips down around the eyesocket area and pulls back, lifting McCaw's head backwards with the force of it. You can see that from two different angles.

Now there is always going to be the thorny issue of intention. (Some philosophers and historians have given up on working out "true intention" long ago) But I'd like to know what others are seeing?

How do you know he didn't get that from tackling someone? Or from anything really. How do you know he didn't get a scratch in the semi? Cory Jane played the match with a big cut on his nose sustained in the Oz game. Should Rougerie be cited for that too?

Stoked the incident didn't lead to a punch up and possible kickable penalty for retaliation. Possibly, the French were chancing thier arm for some retaliation in the 'danger zone'. It didn't work, and i applaud the ABs for holding their nerve. In past WCs we haven't. Rougerie perhaps sacrificed his integrity for the cause. For those that wonder why McCaw didn't make a fuss? This is the NZ way, and he took it to the extreme. He said, you can gouge me, but I will handle the jandle, and you can shove that finger up your triomphe.

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:To try and avoid getting too bogged down in circular arguments here... let's try and describe what we are seeing in that footage.

For me, the damning bit is that Rougerie does not just launch his arms in to the ruck in an effort to get the ball or remove McCaw. He appears to almost delicately move his hand into position (around certain obstacles) and then clearly grips down around the eyesocket area and pulls back, lifting McCaw's head backwards with the force of it. You can see that from two different angles.

Now there is always going to be the thorny issue of intention. (Some philosophers and historians have given up on working out "true intention" long ago) But I'd like to know what others are seeing?

I think you are tryng to tell people what you think you see.

The footage is not clear enough, in my opinion, to make such a certain accusation.

What can be said is that there is contact between hand and face, anything more is guesswork really