Horwill - perspective on a similar challenge.

Horwill will get banned and will miss the next game that's for sure give the strange IRB citing intervention last week. Personally I think it's a wrong decision and was only done so due to political pressure from home nations individuals perhaps at the IRB. 

Had this been a normal match, even a standard test match it wouldn't have been raised... Perhaps the lions are over sensitive after recent physicality issues from past tours???

The fact that it was his face got the review int he first place but if horwill could not see and had no knowledge of what was near his legs then how could he have known to stamp on... Any idea of it being premeditated is a joke.... Had it been another part of jones body bar the groin it wouldn't have raised an eyebrow.

The question is, because it required stitches, because jones was injured from it does that automatically mean a citing, a ban? Of course not, players get injured all the time.... Davies and leafiifano were involved in a collision which got lealifano knocked out... Far more serious then jones'.

In essence this is a contact sport and if the act is not intentional, could not aee the individual, the act was rather mild (jones did come back on) then surely the citing official was correct in his ruling. If we start pulling out every injury from collisions then say goodbye to scrums, rucks, tackling etc.

Anyhow, on the weekend a similar occurrence occurred in the stormers vs cheetahs match. Brussow was accidentally raked by aplon in a ruck, he required facial stitches and came back on. It was unintentional and nothing was done other than the ref have a quiet word. It hasn't been raised and in all probability it won't be. In fact this case was more straightforward... Aplon could clearly see brussow but in his attempt to stay up brushed brussows face with his boot albeit with force.

It just feels wrong that horwill is being held out for special treatment. I'm a big lions fan but im also a big rugby fan and thought it was nothing.... Watch any game and you will see far more intentional physical acts.

These comments by BOD and Gatland have been a little over zealous, I certainly think BODs knock out of Russouw in 09 was far far more intentional and dangerous.... Yet he got away from that (bar injuring himself out of the game and the 3rd test). The campaign to get a player banned serves no purpose and the away the IRB have gone about things speaks nothing of pressure applied by 4 of the 8 irb tier 1 unions.... Who just happen to be the lions too.

In terms of violence, this Lions tour has been a Sunday School picnic compared to the last Lions tour of Aus (in fact compared to virtually all the previous Lions tours since 1974!)

Here's some perspective.
Scenario 1:Ben Lucas gets his ear severed, carried off by the medi-cart and undergoes extensive surgery to have it reattached.Lucas is out of action for several weeks.Despite a complaint from Qld rugby not a peep from the UK media, Lions management or IRB - "lack of conclusive evidence" the IRB say.

Scenario 2:The Lions lock comes off in the 75th minute and gets a couple of stitches above his eye. Strangely, he didn't require stitches at the time of the incident and he is fit to play the following week. The day after the 1st test Lions management complains to the IRB. Quick as a flash Horwill is cited. The NH is in uproar at the supposed intentional dirty play of the Australian captain. Ban him! Ban him they cry! Despite having 9 different camera angles to look at and an IRB appointed Queens Counsel acting for the IRB/Lions, Horwill is cleared, scuttling their plans for series victory in the 2nd test. The Lions management is not at all happy with this so they go higher up in the chain and complain....again. Result? In an unprecedented action, Horwill cited again by the IRB and more than likely will be banned. Ridiculous double standards and it does nothing to deter the stereotype of the whingers from up north, although I lay the blame squarely at the feet of their coach, a man desperate to gain victory over Australia, who have humiliated him time and time again.

This is not a defence of James Horwill. I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the IRB whom, IMO are in the back pocket of the Lions management. Both it seems are desperate for the Lions "brand" to succeed and stay relevant. I am wondering what happens if Horwill is somehow miraculously cleared again? In the NRL if you contest a charge and lose, the ban can be increased. What penalty will the IRB receive if Horwill gets off? Give yourselves an uppercut IRB.

Interesting that when I played rugby I made many trips to A&E for stiches when people had stomped on my head, 90% of the time the culprits were my own team mates.

I am still worried about what the IRB might do if Horwill gets off again. and if he does get found guilty then surely he (Horwill) must have the right of appeal?

Icu wrote:Here's some perspective.
Scenario 1:Ben Lucas gets his ear severed, carried off by the medi-cart and undergoes extensive surgery to have it reattached.Lucas is out of action for several weeks.Despite a complaint from Qld rugby not a peep from the UK media, Lions management or IRB - "lack of conclusive evidence" the IRB say.

Scenario 2:The Lions lock comes off in the 75th minute and gets a couple of stitches above his eye. Strangely, he didn't require stitches at the time of the incident and he is fit to play the following week. The day after the 1st test Lions management complains to the IRB. Quick as a flash Horwill is cited. The NH is in uproar at the supposed intentional dirty play of the Australian captain. Ban him! Ban him they cry! Despite having 9 different camera angles to look at and an IRB appointed Queens Counsel acting for the IRB/Lions, Horwill is cleared, scuttling their plans for series victory in the 2nd test. The Lions management is not at all happy with this so they go higher up in the chain and complain....again. Result? In an unprecedented action, Horwill cited again by the IRB and more than likely will be banned. Ridiculous double standards and it does nothing to deter the stereotype of the whingers from up north, although I lay the blame squarely at the feet of their coach, a man desperate to gain victory over Australia, who have humiliated him time and time again.


This is not a defence of James Horwill. I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the IRB whom, IMO are in the back pocket of the Lions management. Both it seems are desperate for the Lions "brand" to succeed and stay relevant. I am wondering what happens if Horwill is somehow miraculously cleared again? In the NRL if you contest a charge and lose, the ban can be increased. What penalty will the IRB receive if Horwill gets off? Give yourselves an uppercut IRB.

The Farrell / Lucas one is interesting because there were many posts saying, in relation to Horwill, that you always know where your feet are when playing. Maybe you do.

Personally though I have been interested to see the non-citing of Vunipolo. You could argue it was accidental, but in the context of the game, AAC nicks two restarts from that exact angle / position, and on the third attempt he just happens to run into a Lions prop moving the opposite way to his pod, with his elbow cocked, a metre or two beyond the pod. Accidental my arse. Come on down IRB!

Of course Vunipola was intentionally in the way, there's nothing suspicious about it. That doesn't mean he should be cited. As I remember it Vunipola didn't deviate his line, and he for sure didn't use his elbow, AAC ran right into his shoulder.

AAC ran into Vunapola though. I think it would be harsh to cite someone for holding their ground. A penalty for the raised elbow would maybe have been fair.

aucklandlaurie wrote:Interesting that when I played rugby I made many trips to A&E for stiches when people had stomped on my head, 90% of the time the  culprits were my own team mates.

Coaches used to say, If you're on the ground you're part of the ground.

I was once raked down my thigh wiile standing at the side of a ruck in the pillar position. Ref was completely confused by it and just waved play on.

GunsGerms wrote:AAC ran into Vunapola though. I think it would be harsh to cite someone for holding their ground. A penalty for the raised elbow would maybe have been fair.

Is it holding your ground if you are moving beyond the pod in the wrong direction not looking at the ball with your elbow raised?  

Truth is I don't give a Poopie about that incident.  I only give a Poopie about the validity of raising a challenge to the Horwill incident.  Both involve a dodgy strike to the face of an opponent. There is genuinely nothing remarkable about either, but only one is a focus for some reason.