Hore gets 5 weeks

First topic message reminder :

This will probably start a fire as some will see 5 weeks as lenient others may disagree. In my opinion banning someone in weeks is ridiculous. It should be in matches as he will only miss this England game, unless I am mistaken?

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
There was plenty of people willing to get hysterical over those.

Just wait till Dylan Hartley gets fishhooked again, then youll see hysterical

Fair enough, maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention then.

Hartleys assault on McCaw should have been the same BTW IMO - criminal proceedings and 6 month ban.

Its one thing to be reckless and hurt someone without intent, its another to deliberately hurt a person who is not able to defend themselves.

Both have plenty of previous hence the long ban required

BBC: "The Judicial Officer found that the player had not intended to make contact with the victim player's head and this was taken into account"

Whether you think Andrew Hore's actions were those of a gutless thug or a justified bit of rough justice dished out to a lazy runner, the 'Judicial Officer''s comment is bizarre.

Could not have been more intentional. Makes the whole process look amateurish and flawed.

He threw the punch so hard he lost his footing pirouetted and landed on him. Call me old fashioned but what Davies was doing/going to do could not possibly justify that.

Casartelli wrote: Makes the whole process look amateurish

Well thatll please the traditionalists at least

Nothing surprises me about the disciplinary process any more.

When you think that last year we had a player whose ban was significantly reduced because his "previous" had been more than 5 years ago and whilst he was under 18.

The problem being that said "previous" had been committed less than 5 years before, when the offender was fully 19.

ooh MrsP has joined in

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Casartelli wrote: Makes the whole process look amateurish

Well thatll please the traditionalists at least

Well played Sir 8/10

(Lose two points re missing apostrophe)

Reading up they did see it as a high end offence but went in with the minimum for that (8 weeks) then took 3 off for "mitigation".

Hmm.

Meanwhile that Aussie chap (y'know the one whos been all over the front of the papers.....?) got a week for punching an Italian.

With this whole scenario I think the ban fits the crime, the mediation too. Hore is not a renound thug, he has no reputation.

He lost his cool and did something stupid.

If he should repeat offend a severe ban should be inforced.

Regarding the timing of the ban I am absolutely flabbergasted that the NZRFU allow preseason games to count. They absolutely should not.

The saddest thing is the resultant impact of the incidents has a far worse effect for Bradley Davies, his region and for Wales.

Punch a Frenchman and you get vouchers for Marks & Spencer.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Meh...they got the importnat game covered, and made Auklanlaurie and the NZ Herald look like twonks. Thats all that counts.

Really? Throughout this affair I've expressed quite a different viewpoint to that of the New Zealand Herald Journalists/columnists.

Glas a du wrote:He threw the punch so hard he lost his footing pirouetted and landed on him. Call me old fashioned but what Davies was doing/going to do could not possibly justify that.

Glas du: I never saw a punch...Do you have some fresh evidence that none of us, including the IRB are aware of?

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Glas a du wrote:He threw a stiff arm with his hand clenched into a fist so hard he lost his footing pirouetted and landed on him. Call me old fashioned but what Davies was doing/going to do could not possibly justify that.

Glas du: I never saw a punch...Do you have some fresh evidence that none of us, including the IRB are aware of?

sorry auckland, thats been amended for you...


seriously though, how the citing officer can come out and say Hore didn't intend to hit BD's head is beyond me, quite literally beyond.

Barry Davies is the guy who was being called a thug and a bully in the 6nations for his tip tackle on D Ryan. He is Wales only real enforcer at lock, this is not a soft guy, he suffered serious concussion, this doesn't happen if someone is 'reaching round to pull him back' as I've seen some say on here.

Overall ridiculous by the citing committee again.

i want to reiterate SERIOUS concussion, as if concussion wasn't serious enough.

Like most I think it should be in games not weeks, he will miss the England game but then thats it.

The remaining 4 weeks should be converted to games and he misses the next 4 games

They've done that by including pre season friendlies Bed, even though the off season wasn't supposed to count as part of the ban.

Comfort

The problem with Glas du in his comments is that he is letting his emotions over ride the facts as to what actually occurred.

Hore did NOT clench his fist
Hore did NOT punch Davies
Hore was not charged with punching Davies, it was a striking charge.
The judiciary were satisfied that it was an open hand.

More impotantly Hore was trying to get/hook Davies out of his way, it looked to me that Davies was trying to bully Hore, something I doubt he will reattempt for quite some time.

aucklandlaurie wrote: Comfort

The problem with Glas du in his comments is that he is letting his emotions over ride the facts as to what actually occurred.

Hore did NOT clench his fist
Hore did NOT punch Davies
Hore was not charged with punching Davies, it was a striking charge.
The judiciary were satisfied that it was an open hand.

More impotantly Hore was trying to get/hook Davies out of his way, it looked to me that Davies was trying to bully Hore, something I doubt he will reattempt for quite some time.

Auckland,

You're right in the no fist punch comment but there are other ways to get an opponent out of the way and ones that wouldn't have got Hore a ban

Glas a du wrote:They've done that by including pre season friendlies Bed, even though the off season wasn't supposed to count as part of the ban.

??? Surely the ban was in a number of weeks ... 5 weeks. The off season has always counted as part of this (eg Callum **** Clarke )

I think in the longer bans it probably is but not for the shorter ones.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Glas a du wrote:They've done that by including pre season friendlies Bed, even though the off season wasn't supposed to count as part of the ban.

??? Surely the ban was in a number of weeks ... 5 weeks. The off season has always counted as part of this (eg Callum **** Clarke )

I think that NZ has chosen to interpret as "available" games and extend it. Either that or they haven't read the fine print and figured out he doesn't have to miss the Super match

bedfordwelsh wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: Comfort

The problem with Glas du in his comments is that he is letting his emotions over ride the facts as to what actually occurred.

Hore did NOT clench his fist
Hore did NOT punch Davies
Hore was not charged with punching Davies, it was a striking charge.
The judiciary were satisfied that it was an open hand.

More impotantly Hore was trying to get/hook Davies out of his way, it looked to me that Davies was trying to bully Hore, something I doubt he will reattempt for quite some time.

Auckland,

You're right in the no fist punch comment but there are other ways to get an opponent out of the way and ones that wouldn't have got Hore a ban

True Bedford, my initial feeling was that he should have bound onto Davies and drove him into the back of the New Zealand side of the maul and milked the penalty. even though he was quite some distance from the Maul/breakdown.

http://www.espnscrum.com/new-zealand-tour-2012/rugby/story/173808.html

New Zealand hooker Andrew Hore has been banned for five weeks .....Professor Lorne Crerar, who was judicial officer for the hearing, recommended an entry point of eight weeks.....and imposed a suspension of five weeks

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Glas a du wrote:They've done that by including pre season friendlies Bed, even though the off season wasn't supposed to count as part of the ban.

??? Surely the ban was in a number of weeks ... 5 weeks. The off season has always counted as part of this (eg Callum **** Clarke )

I think that NZ has chosen to interpret as "available" games and extend it. Either that or they haven't read the fine print and figured out he doesn't have to miss the Super match

Right got it ...so they have in effect extended his ban for him ...and are no getting accused of shenanigans for doing so?

Jeez

I doubt if Hore would have participated in the three pre season games anyway. If my memory serves me right he didnt play in any of the pre season games last year.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
I doubt if Hore would have participated in the three pre season games anyway. If my memory serves me right he didnt play in any of the pre season games last year.

Most ABs are given annual leave in Dec/Jan, so he might have played the final one - last year due to the RWC the ABs' leave ran later.

aucklandlaurie wrote: Comfort

The problem with Glas du in his comments is that he is letting his emotions over ride the facts as to what actually occurred.

Hore did NOT clench his fist
Hore did NOT punch Davies
Hore was not charged with punching Davies, it was a striking charge.
The judiciary were satisfied that it was an open hand.

More impotantly Hore was trying to get/hook Davies out of his way, it looked to me that Davies was trying to bully Hore, something I doubt he will reattempt for quite some time.

I'm just glad it's all been sorted out and it was just a simple accident.

my initial feeling was that he should have bound onto Davies and drove him into the back of the New Zealand side of the maul and milked the penalty.

STOP THE PRESS!

I actually agree with this. A firm two handed push would have been fine also, although he himself may have copped a penalty for that (note: irony)

PJHolybloke wrote:I'm just glad it's all been sorted out and it was just a simple accident.

MODS, MODS THIS IS SLANDEROUS RACISM!

yes, this was all because of the attempted bullying by davies.

you'll have to show me where in the video this 'attempted bullying' takes place.

all i see is Davies run a typical forward line back towards the ruck (which of course is set in its course to get in the way of opposing forwards) and Hore loses it.

if his hand ISNT clenched then you can call me shirley and milk my toes.

and yes, the citing commissioner couldn't be satisfied AND wrong, cause thats never happened before....


look, I'm not looking into some manhunt for Hore, frankly thats happened and it doesn't matter, the game was lost by half time anyway, in no way is it to blame for the defeat (unless of course you're a cynic and look at the lack 2nd row cover on the bench - couldn't resist).

But my real problem is the spineless words coming out from the citing. I'll wait until the full report is available (if anyone can post it up that'd be swell) but what I've seen so far is completely the opposite of how I saw it, and see it, every time i watch it.

aucklandlaurie wrote: Comfort

The problem with Glas du in his comments is that he is letting his emotions over ride the facts as to what actually occurred.

Hore did NOT clench his fist
Hore did NOT punch Davies
Hore was not charged with punching Davies, it was a striking charge.
The judiciary were satisfied that it was an open hand.

More impotantly Hore was trying to get/hook Davies out of his way, it looked to me that Davies was trying to bully Hore, something I doubt he will reattempt for quite some time.

What one eyed nonsense. It was not attempting to hook him - it was deliberate attempt to injure. Adrenaline fuelled perhpas not premeditated but a 5 week ban for that is outrageously lenient. Davies attempting to bully hore?

I am sorry but that makes you a sterotypical NZ fan unable to see serious foul play by your player adn able to twist the incedent to make out your boy is blameless

Laurie I alleged conspiracy previously, but I have to say, this decision seems due to incompetence rather than conspiracy. I think the 3 wise would have done better.

Easy now TJ, Laurie is a passionate fan sticking up for his man, cut him some slack. I actually admire his style.

...whilst totally disagreeing with his POV, natch...

Its on Wales Today now. Hore was careful enough to leave the scene and go and lie head down in a ruck immediately afterwards...

I think the IRB need to take a long look at themselves over issuses such as this.Scenario:- World Cup final-five minutes to go,this (Hores) sort of action is dished out on an opposing player who looks like he's going to score a try to win the final-ref misses it-transgressing team win world cup-citing panel sit-find player guilty-five week ban for player involved-do the citing officials overturn WCF result-No,player happy to accept five week ban as his side has won the WC.-some thought methinks on wether we go down the road of the fouth official being able to adjudicate on serious foul play.

Why should a fan stick up for his man in defence of thuggery?

I am a passionate scots fan and would want any scots player doing that to never be considered for selection again.

There is no place in the game for deliberately injuring a player. It was no accident, it was not clumsey tackle / clear out. He hit a man from behind and knocked him out - deliberately. Its indefensible

Iz it coz he's an All Black?

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Glas a du wrote:He threw the punch so hard he lost his footing pirouetted and landed on him. Call me old fashioned but what Davies was doing/going to do could not possibly justify that.

Glas du: I never saw a punch...Do you have some fresh evidence that none of us, including the IRB are aware of?

This is a good point. A closer look at the pics of the incident show that Hore actually strikes Davies with the bony part of the inside of the wrist/forearm in some sort of martial arts move that looks much more dangerous than a mere punch.

I suspect this is why the IRB have quickly put out a view that it wasn't intentional. A couple of inches higher and it would have caved the side of Davies' face in.

TJ wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote: Comfort

The problem with Glas du in his comments is that he is letting his emotions over ride the facts as to what actually occurred.

Hore did NOT clench his fist
Hore did NOT punch Davies
Hore was not charged with punching Davies, it was a striking charge.
The judiciary were satisfied that it was an open hand.

More impotantly Hore was trying to get/hook Davies out of his way, it looked to me that Davies was trying to bully Hore, something I doubt he will reattempt for quite some time.

What one eyed nonsense. It was not attempting to hook him - it was deliberate attempt to injure. Adrenaline fuelled perhpas not premeditated but a 5 week ban for that is outrageously lenient. Davies attempting to bully hore?

I am sorry but that makes you a sterotypical NZ fan unable to see serious foul play by your player adn able to twist the incedent to make out your boy is blameless

Interesting interpretation! On 606 alone a number of New Zealanders have taken differing viewpoints and opinions on this matter, How can mine be sterotypical?

Because the stereotypical NZ fan can not see their players do any wrong and any citing / punishment of them is unfair. Thats the stereotype.

Casartelli wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Glas a du wrote:He threw the punch so hard he lost his footing pirouetted and landed on him. Call me old fashioned but what Davies was doing/going to do could not possibly justify that.

Glas du: I never saw a punch...Do you have some fresh evidence that none of us, including the IRB are aware of?

This is a good point. A closer look at the pics of the incident show that Hore actually strikes Davies with the bony part of the inside of the wrist/forearm in some sort of martial arts move that looks much more dangerous than a mere punch.

I suspect this is why the IRB have quickly put out a view that it wasn't intentional. A couple of inches higher and it would have caved the side of Davies' face in.

In a Court it doesn't really matter about how you do it, if you strike somebody you cop it for the resulting injuries.

TJ wrote:Because the stereotypical NZ fan can not see their players do any wrong and any citing / punishment of them is unfair. Thats the stereotype.

Fixed that for you TJ

Stereotypes are a load of bunk most of the time.

I think it's important to accentuate the positives in these cases, in an otherwise clinical and almost perfectly executed game plan, it's refreshing to note that a NZ player can be so sloppy.

Really, it fills me with hope for the future, they're getting careless.

PJHolybloke wrote:I think it's important to accentuate the positives in these cases, in an otherwise clinical and almost perfectly executed game plan, it's refreshing to note that a NZ player can be so sloppy.

Really, it fills me with hope for the future, they're getting careless.

Oh hang on

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

PJHolybloke wrote:I think it's important to accentuate the positives in these cases, in an otherwise clinical and almost perfectly executed game plan, it's refreshing to note that a NZ player can be so sloppy.

Really, it fills me with hope for the future, they're getting careless.

Oh hang on

Thank you, you've been a marvellous audience, I'm here all week.

Glas a du wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Glas a du wrote:He threw the punch so hard he lost his footing pirouetted and landed on him. Call me old fashioned but what Davies was doing/going to do could not possibly justify that.

Glas du: I never saw a punch...Do you have some fresh evidence that none of us, including the IRB are aware of?

This is a good point. A closer look at the pics of the incident show that Hore actually strikes Davies with the bony part of the inside of the wrist/forearm in some sort of martial arts move that looks much more dangerous than a mere punch.

I suspect this is why the IRB have quickly put out a view that it wasn't intentional. A couple of inches higher and it would have caved the side of Davies' face in.

In a Court it doesn't really matter about how you do it, if you strike somebody you cop it for the resulting injuries.

In a court of law the victim (Davies) would have to give evidence, thus exposing him to cross examination by the defence, and any half competent lawyer would then be able to show the court that Davies provoked the whole incident.

That's far to clever for this sight PJ...

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Glas a du wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Glas a du wrote:He threw the punch so hard he lost his footing pirouetted and landed on him. Call me old fashioned but what Davies was doing/going to do could not possibly justify that.

Glas du: I never saw a punch...Do you have some fresh evidence that none of us, including the IRB are aware of?

This is a good point. A closer look at the pics of the incident show that Hore actually strikes Davies with the bony part of the inside of the wrist/forearm in some sort of martial arts move that looks much more dangerous than a mere punch.

I suspect this is why the IRB have quickly put out a view that it wasn't intentional. A couple of inches higher and it would have caved the side of Davies' face in.

In a Court it doesn't really matter about how you do it, if you strike somebody you cop it for the resulting injuries.

In a court of law the victim (Davies) would have to give evidence, thus exposing him to cross examination by the defence, and any half competent lawyer would then be able to show the court that Davies provoked the whole incident.

See, he's brilliant. Have you got some time on your hands, Peter Mandelson needs to sharpen up his technique.