This Weekend's Citings

by **LondonTiger** Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:17 pm

http://www.epcrugby.com/news/32311.php#.Vp0q9vmLTcs wrote:

Viktor Kolelishvili (ASM Clermont Auvergne)

EPCR has received a citing complaint against the ASM Clermont Auvergne flanker, Viktor Kolelishvili (No 7), following the European Rugby Champions Cup Round 5 match against the Ospreys at Liberty Stadium on Friday, 15 January 2016.

Kolelishvili pushed the match referee, Wayne Barnes (England), in the 17th minute of the match in contravention of Law 10.4 (m).

The complaint was made by the match Citing Commissioner, Mike Rafter (England)

David Martin (Ireland) has been appointed as the independent Judicial Officer for the disciplinary hearing which will take place in Paris on Tuesday, 19 January 2016.

Law 10.4 (m) Physical abuse of match officials
Under World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 10.4 (m), Physical abuse of a match official, carries the following sanction entry points - Low End: 24 weeks; Mid-Range: 48 weeks; Top End: 96+ weeks to life

Tim Swinson (Glasgow Warriors)

EPCR has received a citing complaint against the Glasgow Warriors flanker, Tim Swinson (No 19), following the European Rugby Champions Cup Round 5 match against Northampton Saints at Franklin's Gardens on Sunday, 17 January 2016.

Swinson is alleged to have punched the Northampton Saints replacement hooker, Mikey Haywood (No 16), in the 74th minute of the match in contravention of Law 10.4 (a). Swinson was shown a yellow card for the incident by match referee, Romain Poite (France).

The complaint was made by the match Citing Commissioner, Jeff Mark (Wales).

Simon Thomas (Wales) has been appointed as the independent Judicial Officer for the disciplinary hearing which will take place in London on Wednesday (20 January 2016).

Law 10.4 (a) Striking with a hand, arm or fist
Under World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 10.4 (a), Striking with a hand, arm or fist, carries the following sanction entry points - Low End: 2 weeks; Mid-Range: 5 weeks; Top End: 8 to 52 weeks.

Ryan Wilson (Glasgow Warriors)

EPCR has received a citing complaint against the Glasgow Warriors flanker, Ryan Wilson (No 6), following the European Rugby Champions Cup Round 5 match against Northampton Saints at Franklin's Gardens on Sunday, 17 January 2016.

Wilson is alleged to have grabbed the testicles of the Northampton Saints scrum half, Lee Dickson (No 9), in the 25th minute of the match in contravention of Law 10.4 (m).

The complaint was made by the match Citing Commissioner, Jeff Mark (Wales).

Simon Thomas (Wales) has been appointed as the independent Judicial Officer for the disciplinary hearing which will take place in London on Wednesday 20 January 2016.

Law 10.4 (m) Testicle grabbing or twisting or squeezing
Under World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 10.4 (m), Testicle grabbing or twisting or squeezing carries the following sanction entry points - Low End: 12 weeks; Mid-Range: 18 weeks; Top End: 24+ to 208 weeks.

Chris Ashton (Saracens)

EPCR has received a citing complaint against the Saracens wing, Chris Ashton (No 14), following the European Rugby Champions Cup Round 5 match against Ulster Rugby on Saturday, 16 January 2016.

Ashton is alleged to have made contact with the eye(s) and/or eye area of the Ulster centre, Luke Marshall (No 13), in the 16th minute of the match in contravention of Law 10.4 (m).

The complaint was by the match Citing Commissioner, Yves Thieffine (France).

Jean-Noel Couraud (France) has been appointed as the independent Judicial Officer for the disciplinary hearing which will take place in London on Wednesday 20 January 2016.

Law 10.4 (m) Contact with the eye(s) and/or eye area
Under World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 10.4 (m), Contact with the eye(s) and/or eye area carries the following sanction entry points - Low End: 12 weeks; Mid-Range: 18 weeks; Top End: 24 to 208 weeks.

T Rhys Thomas (Newport Gwent Dragons)

EPCR has received a citing complaint against the Newport Gwent Dragons replacement hooker, T Rhys Thomas (No 16), following the European Rugby Challenge Cup Round 5 match against Castres Olympique on Friday, 15 January 2016.

Rhys Thomas is alleged to have bitten the Castres Olympique back row, Thomas Caballero (No 6), in the 67th minute of the match in contravention of Law 10.4 (m).

The complaint was made by match Citing Commissioner, Dave Guyan (England).

Rod McKenzie (Scotland) has been appointed as the independent Judicial Officer for the disciplinary hearing which will take place in London on Wednesday 20 January 2016.

Law 10.4 (m) Biting
Under World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 10.4 (m), Biting, carries the following sanction entry points - Low End: 12 weeks; Mid-Range: 18 weeks; Top End: 24+ to 208 weeks.

Red card

Alexandre Bias (Castres Olympique)

The Castres Olympique replacement second row, Alexandre Bias (No 19), was issued with a red card during the European Rugby Challenge Cup, Round 5 match against the Newport Gwent Dragons on Friday, 15 January 2016.

Bias was sent off by referee, Peter Fizgibbon (Ireland), in the 57th minute of the match for an alleged dangerous tackle on the Newport Gwent Dragons player, Phil Price (No 1), in contravention of Law 10.4 (e).

David Martin (Ireland) has been appointed as the independent Judicial Officer for the disciplinary hearing which will take place in Paris on Tuesday, 19 January 2016.

Law 10.4 (e) Dangerous tackling of an opponent
Under World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 10.4 (e), Dangerous tackling of an Opponent, carries the following sanction entry points - Low End: 2 weeks; Mid-Range: 6 weeks; Top End: 10 to 52 weeks.

Notes

(i) Red Cards
a) The case of any player sent off in European Rugby Champions Cup and Challenge Cup games shall be adjudicated by an independent Judicial Officer as soon as is practicable.
b) Until the hearing the player is ineligible to play in any tournament.

(ii) Citing Commissioner
a) Citing Commissioners are appointed by EPCR for all European Rugby Champions Cup and all televised Challenge Cup matches and shall be entitled to cite a player for any act or acts of Foul Play that in the Citing Commissioner's opinion warranted a red card.
b) For such matches, clubs will not have the power to cite a player but may refer incidents to the Citing Commissioner within 26 hours of the start of the match.
c) The Citing Commissioner will have 50 hours from the start of the match to make a citing. In certain circumstances this deadline can be extended.
d) The tournament Disciplinary Officer may forward the submitted citing to a Citing Officer to determine whether there are sufficient grounds for the citing to progress.
e) The Disciplinary Officer will then bring a charge against the cited player.

(iii) Disciplinary Hearing
a) The independent Judicial Officer is chosen by the chairman of the independent Disciplinary Panel, Professor Lorne Crerar.
b) EPCR's Disciplinary Officer presents the case against the player.
c) If a decision is upheld, the independent Judicial Officer will be required to consider the appropriate sanction. Under World Rugby's sanctioning regime, which EPCR is obliged to follow, the Judicial Officer will first assess the seriousness of the player's actions and determine which of the three stipulated entry points (lower end, mid range and top end) is the most appropriate.
d) The Judicial Officer will determine the appropriate entry point based on his/her assessment of a number of particular characteristics of the player's actions, including whether or not they were intentional, whether or not they caused any injuries and whether or not they had any effect on the relevant match.
e) After deciding the entry point, the Judicial Officer will then consider whether the suspension should be increased from the entry point to take account of certain specified aggravating factors, such as a poor disciplinary record or the need for deterrence, and/or decreased from the entry point to take account of certain specified mitigating actions, such as a guilty plea, a good disciplinary record, the player's conduct at the hearing and expressions of remorse.
d) A suspension is a blanket ban from playing rugby union anywhere in the world.
e) Both parties to the hearing (EPCR and the player) have the right to appeal decisions of the independent Disciplinary Hearing. Appeals must be lodged within three (3) working days of receiving the full written decision of the Judicial Officer.
f) The full written decision of the Judicial Officer will be available on www.epcrugby.com/discipline/news.php when the disciplinary process is complete.
g) For World Rugby's Sanctions for Foul Play, found at Appendix 1 to World Rugby Regulation 17, please go to www.worldrugby.org

by Poorfour Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:28 pm

Some pretty high-stakes hearings coming up just before the 6N...

by **LondonTiger** Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:40 pm

I hope the citing officers are being over-zealous, otherwise that is an unsavoury bunch of accusations:

assaulting the ref
eye gouging
ball grabbing
biting

by mikey_dragon Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:48 pm

Where's Dylan Hartley....

by nathan Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:49 pm

mikey_dragon wrote:Where's Dylan Hartley....

He didn't do much in the 60 minutes he was in the field, that includes committing foul play.

by tigertattie Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:02 pm

Ryan bloody Wilson!!!

I hope to god he was pulling on Dickson's shorts

by whocares Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:26 pm

LondonTiger wrote:I hope the citing officers are being over-zealous, otherwise that is an unsavoury bunch of accusations:

assaulting the ref
eye gouging
ball grabbing
biting

Looks like we're back to the 80's except for the 1st one. The others were frequently happening during the same game (talking about France here)

by nathan Mon Jan 18, 2016 8:45 pm

http://www.balls.ie/rugby/gif-the-unnecessary-incident-that-saw-glasgow-flanker-ryan-wilson-cited-for-testicle-grabbing/321922

Made me laugh when I saw which website this was on

by Geordie Mon Jan 18, 2016 8:54 pm

I think its made us all laugh Nathan...my gf has just asked what I'm chuckling at....

by HammerofThunor Mon Jan 18, 2016 9:25 pm

Really wish BBC et al would stop reporting the Low Entry Level as the minimum ban. The cynic in me thinks they do it purpose so it's more exciting when some gets below the 'minimum'

by Guest Mon Jan 18, 2016 9:35 pm

BBC states that Dragons hooker Rhys Thomas, accused of biting, could face a ban of between 12 and 208 weeks! That's one hell of a range. 4 years is a bit much, not that I condone biting in any way. 12 weeks seems lengthy enough to me at the low end.

by Scottrf Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:08 pm

I'm fairly sure this incident wasn't what they were thinking of when they wrote the physical abuse of match officials law.

by madmaccas Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:10 am

Here's Ryan Wilson's ball polishing incident.

by **Notch** Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:18 am

Actually the Ashton incident is a little bit worse than I remembered. I'm slightly aggrieved it wasn't at least a yellow now Shocked

Reminds me slightly of Alan Quinlan on Leo Cullen. Won't be too severe, but you know the minimum is still quite high.

by Pete330v2 Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:14 am

I thought the Ashton offence was a bit of nothing to be honest but I'll have to have another look at it. Is there a link to it anywhere, I can't find anything on it.

by sad_gimp Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:26 am

Pete330v2 wrote:I thought the Ashton offence was a bit of nothing to be honest but I'll have to have another look at it. Is there a link to it anywhere, I can't find anything on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9ounwaeeDU

I'm on the fence, it doesn't look too bad, but on the other hand, he did know exactly what he was doing and knows that officials are extremely sharp on tackling/clearing out by the head or neck.

by Pete330v2 Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:34 am

Thanks Mid_Gen, it does look worse than I remembered. I've seen long bans for less. His hand definately rakes across Marshall's face but it'll be up to the citing commission whether or not there's contact with the eyes. It could mean Ashton's up for a bit of a lengthy holiday.

by BamBam Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:36 am

Its the kind of cowardly "tackle" that Ashton likes, pulling people down from behind by the head/neck/hair.

A ban might teach him a lesson, although I'm not sure that its a gouge

by Guest Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:35 am

I think it was a deliberate gouge. The clip above doesn't show it, but in another clip you can see that Ashton separates two fingers from the other two, just before moving his hand to Marshalls face. That would be a very unusual action for any type of tackle. Also, if you watch Marshalls reaction, in real time before the slow mo clips, he is obviously reacting to fingers in the eye, and makes the point of explaining that is what had happened.

by formerly known as Sam Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:55 am

Once cited for contact with the eye area it's near impossible not to cop a ban. As the eye area involves the face and even with a lack of malice they still do you for being reckless. Ashton will get banned unless they can prove he didn't make contact with the face.

by beshocked Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:59 am

Don't think it was a gouge by Ashton. Stupid and reckless yes but I don't think there was intent to make contact with the eyes.

I think he's just looking to drag the man out, remember everything looks worse in slow motion. Also he has a tendency to do this, occasionally by non legal means.

If he gets a ban though he only has himself to blame because it's just unnecessary.

by Pete330v2 Tue Jan 19, 2016 11:14 am

Alan Quinlan copped a lengthy ban and missed a Lions tour for stroking Leo Cullen's handsome face. Very little in it, no actual gouge made but contact was made with the 'eye area'. I can't see Ashton doing any splashing for a few months.
I do believe it was entirely unintentional though so it's a shame for the lad.

by beshocked Tue Jan 19, 2016 11:41 am

mid_gen wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:I thought the Ashton offence was a bit of nothing to be honest but I'll have to have another look at it. Is there a link to it anywhere, I can't find anything on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9ounwaeeDU

I'm on the fence, it doesn't look too bad, but on the other hand, he did know exactly what he was doing and knows that officials are extremely sharp on tackling/clearing out by the head or neck.

I've changed my mind.

If you stop the footage about 1:55-1:57 it does look like Ashton touches his face. The camera angle shown on the TMO doesn't show this.

I do think he's going to cop a ban, potentially hefty.

I still don't think that Ashton did it intentionally but it's potentially very dangerous.

by **Notch** Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:06 pm

beshocked wrote:I still don't think that Ashton did it intentionally but it's potentially very dangerous.

Yeah, thats my take on it too.

by IanBru Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:19 pm

madmaccas wrote:Here's Ryan Wilson's ball polishing incident.

To be honest, you usually have to pay extra for that, even in Newcastle's classier establishments.

by brennomac Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:38 pm

beshocked wrote:
mid_gen wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:I thought the Ashton offence was a bit of nothing to be honest but I'll have to have another look at it. Is there a link to it anywhere, I can't find anything on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9ounwaeeDU

I'm on the fence, it doesn't look too bad, but on the other hand, he did know exactly what he was doing and knows that officials are extremely sharp on tackling/clearing out by the head or neck.

I've changed my mind.

If you stop the footage about 1:55-1:57 it does look like Ashton touches his face. The camera angle shown on the TMO doesn't show this.

I do think he's going to cop a ban, potentially hefty.

I still don't think that Ashton did it intentionally but it's potentially very dangerous.

Agree with all that, not a blatant gouge like the one on Stander by the Stade winger, but still likely to get a ban - duration will depend on how he tells the tribunal how sorry he is and the usual other bullsh1t

by HammerofThunor Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:32 pm

Standard has been (for a while now), if you put your hands in someone face deliberately and contact was made with the eye area, it's considered reckless and banned at the low entry level at least. The only thing that doesn't seem to fall under this are hand offs, which some players often do to the face and their fingers clearly make contact with eye area. Although I seem to remember someone getting banned for handing someone off to the face and blinding them.

Found it. Done for striking.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/7893035/Whitehaven-flanker-Callum-Jennings-banned-for-five-years.html

by **Notch** Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:46 pm

Re. the ban for Viktor Kolelishvili. Does anyone else agree with me that he fully merits the ban but it did not merit a red card at the time?

The citing commission concluded in their report that it did indeed merit a red card, as they do with all upheld citings. But I can't see it myself; certainly his subsequent actions merited at least one yellow card and Barnes was very generous in not issuing a second yellow right before he was unceremoniously hauled off for his own good. But in isolation, and without exercising hindsight regarding what happened after that incident which Barnes obviously didn't know at the time, I thought stopping the game and giving him a very stern talking to and a warning as well as penalising him was the right call. A young guy, way too pumped up, doing a stupid thing but without actually endangering anyone on the pitch; surely the best course of action is a warning and then produce cards if he does not respond to that warning and get himself together. I thought Barnes' response was sympathetic and mature refereeing, appreciating the wider context, and he didn't go to the nuclear option and ruin the game in a situation where he really did not need to. Instead he used his discretion and let the game flow, which is the mark of a great ref imo and something I've criticised him for not doing in the past. On average, you'd probably have a red card given out every weekend across the three European leagues.

AND YET I have absolutely no problem with the subsequent ban. I agree that it should be discouraged in the strongest terms, and the entry point is sufficiently high- and halving it due to his immediate remorse and apology is also fair.

The way I see it; it's very well and good for a citing commission to say an incident in retrospect should be a red card offence but if referees actually treated incidents like they do without considering the wider context of the game and judging the situation- we would literally be swimming in red cards. It would be a blight on the game.

I don't think that for a citing to be upheld they need to amend the referees decision. I think the red card should only be used either if that player has demonstrated through violent or sufficiently reckless conduct that he poses a danger to other players, officials or spectators, or else for serial offending in the face of warnings; much of the rest can be sorted out by the citing commission after the fact. But that doesn't mean these incidents should be reclassified as red card offences in my view. Thoughts?

by formerly known as Sam Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:02 pm

Pete330v2 wrote:Alan Quinlan copped a lengthy ban and missed a Lions tour for stroking Leo Cullen's handsome face. Very little in it, no actual gouge made but contact was made with the 'eye area'. I can't see Ashton doing any splashing for a few months.
I do believe it was entirely unintentional though so it's a shame for the lad.

By stroking you mean pulling out of ruck by the face? Definitely no gouge but contact with face. Owen Williams missed a summer tour with Wales for making marginal contact on Burrell's face during a ruck clear out. As Hammer says make contact with the face and your in line for a ban.

by Guest Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:48 pm

Bias of Castres had a week ban, which I suppose is right given Castres are out and only have one game left in this season's tournament.

I have seen a video of TRT's alleged bite and I can't see how they can ban him for it. There's nothing very clear in it. Surely the "victim" complained to the ref and showed teeth marks? I would be surprised if anything came of it.

by Pot Hale Tue Jan 19, 2016 6:12 pm

beshocked wrote:
mid_gen wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:I thought the Ashton offence was a bit of nothing to be honest but I'll have to have another look at it. Is there a link to it anywhere, I can't find anything on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9ounwaeeDU

I'm on the fence, it doesn't look too bad, but on the other hand, he did know exactly what he was doing and knows that officials are extremely sharp on tackling/clearing out by the head or neck.

I've changed my mind.

If you stop the footage about 1:55-1:57 it does look like Ashton touches his face. The camera angle shown on the TMO doesn't show this.

I do think he's going to cop a ban, potentially hefty.

I still don't think that Ashton did it intentionally but it's potentially very dangerous.

You don't think he did what intentionally?

He clearly chooses to take a different approach to tacking the player and deliberately moves his arm and hand up from underneath the players arm to take the player around the head. From behind the player, he puts his hand across the front of his head in the face area. And his hand stays over the player's face as he drags him down.

All of that is intentional by Ashton to achieve his objective of removing the player.

As to whether he made contact with the player's eye area in the process, it can't be seen on the camera angles provided so far.

by Pete330v2 Tue Jan 19, 2016 6:13 pm

You cannot intentionally get in any way physical with a referee and that basic and simple area of respect must be maintained at all costs which is why Kolelishvili got such a harsh ban. If we allow respect to be chipped away even slightly eventually we end up with players in refs faces just like soccer so we can never allow any erosion of values.
I agree with you Notch in that the act itself didn't warrant the player being sent off as it wasn't reckless and didn't endanger anyone. The citing commission has sent out a very clear and strong message for a change in protection of the sport's values so bravo to them.

by Seagultaf Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:54 pm

Pete330v2 wrote:You cannot intentionally get in any way physical with a referee and that basic and simple area of respect must be maintained at all costs which is why Kolelishvili got such a harsh ban. If we allow respect to be chipped away even slightly eventually we end up with players in refs faces just like soccer so we can never allow any erosion of values.
I agree with you Notch in that the act itself didn't warrant the player being sent off as it wasn't reckless and didn't endanger anyone. The citing commission has sent out a very clear and strong message for a change in protection of the sport's values so bravo to them.

I think that this ban is really harsh, Barnes is an experienced referee but he was standing in a position where he was obstructing the first defender. There are probably better ways for telling the ref to get out of the way, but I think that Barnes caused this problem by obstructing the defence. AWJ has it right get on with the game and keep out of the way of the defence.

I think to send the right message Kolelishvili should get a token one week ban.................and two weeks ban for Barnes!

by nathan Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:57 pm

Seagultaf wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:You cannot intentionally get in any way physical with a referee and that basic and simple area of respect must be maintained at all costs which is why Kolelishvili got such a harsh ban. If we allow respect to be chipped away even slightly eventually we end up with players in refs faces just like soccer so we can never allow any erosion of values.
I agree with you Notch in that the act itself didn't warrant the player being sent off as it wasn't reckless and didn't endanger anyone. The citing commission has sent out a very clear and strong message for a change in protection of the sport's values so bravo to them.

I think that this ban is really harsh, Barnes is an experienced referee but he was standing in a position where he was obstructing the first defender. There are probably better ways for telling the ref to get out of the way, but I think that Barnes caused this problem by obstructing the defence. AWJ has it right get on with the game and keep out of the way of the defence.

I think to send the right message Kolelishvili should get a token one week ban.................and two weeks ban for Barnes!

That's just silly, regardless of if Barnes is in the wrong position, you don't go and push him. I'm finding it hard to think of any reason anyone would find that acceptable.

by Seagultaf Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:58 pm

Pot Hale wrote:
beshocked wrote:
mid_gen wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:I thought the Ashton offence was a bit of nothing to be honest but I'll have to have another look at it. Is there a link to it anywhere, I can't find anything on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9ounwaeeDU

I'm on the fence, it doesn't look too bad, but on the other hand, he did know exactly what he was doing and knows that officials are extremely sharp on tackling/clearing out by the head or neck.

I've changed my mind.

If you stop the footage about 1:55-1:57 it does look like Ashton touches his face. The camera angle shown on the TMO doesn't show this.

I do think he's going to cop a ban, potentially hefty.

I still don't think that Ashton did it intentionally but it's potentially very dangerous.

You don't think he did what intentionally?

He clearly chooses to take a different approach to tacking the player and deliberately moves his arm and hand up from underneath the players arm to take the player around the head. From behind the player, he puts his hand across the front of his head in the face area. And his hand stays over the player's face as he drags him down.

All of that is intentional by Ashton to achieve his objective of removing the player.

As to whether he made contact with the player's eye area in the process, it can't be seen on the camera angles provided so far.

Ashton clearly and intentionally dragged his hand across the Ulster players eyes. However the citing process in rugby union is so unpredictable anything could happen from a lifetime ban for Ashton to the Ulster player getting banned, this discipline procedure is bringing the game into disrepute!

by formerly known as Sam Tue Jan 19, 2016 8:49 pm

Seagultaf wrote:
Pot Hale wrote:
beshocked wrote:
mid_gen wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:I thought the Ashton offence was a bit of nothing to be honest but I'll have to have another look at it. Is there a link to it anywhere, I can't find anything on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9ounwaeeDU

I'm on the fence, it doesn't look too bad, but on the other hand, he did know exactly what he was doing and knows that officials are extremely sharp on tackling/clearing out by the head or neck.

I've changed my mind.

If you stop the footage about 1:55-1:57 it does look like Ashton touches his face. The camera angle shown on the TMO doesn't show this.

I do think he's going to cop a ban, potentially hefty.

I still don't think that Ashton did it intentionally but it's potentially very dangerous.

You don't think he did what intentionally?

He clearly chooses to take a different approach to tacking the player and deliberately moves his arm and hand up from underneath the players arm to take the player around the head. From behind the player, he puts his hand across the front of his head in the face area. And his hand stays over the player's face as he drags him down.

All of that is intentional by Ashton to achieve his objective of removing the player.

As to whether he made contact with the player's eye area in the process, it can't be seen on the camera angles provided so far.

Ashton clearly and intentionally dragged his hand across the Ulster players eyes. However the citing process in rugby union is so unpredictable anything could happen from a lifetime ban for Ashton to the Ulster player getting banned, this discipline procedure is bringing the game into disrepute!

There's nothing clear from that footage to make the claim he rakes the eyes. The left arm is clearly across the face but you can't see where the right hand is. Unless there's another piece of footage showing a different angle it's a ban for reckless play and making contact around the eye area. 12 weeks. Unless he has Calum Clark's lawyer then it'll be 3.

by Exiledinborders Tue Jan 19, 2016 8:50 pm

Seagultaf wrote:
Pot Hale wrote:
beshocked wrote:
mid_gen wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:I thought the Ashton offence was a bit of nothing to be honest but I'll have to have another look at it. Is there a link to it anywhere, I can't find anything on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9ounwaeeDU

I'm on the fence, it doesn't look too bad, but on the other hand, he did know exactly what he was doing and knows that officials are extremely sharp on tackling/clearing out by the head or neck.

I've changed my mind.

If you stop the footage about 1:55-1:57 it does look like Ashton touches his face. The camera angle shown on the TMO doesn't show this.

I do think he's going to cop a ban, potentially hefty.

I still don't think that Ashton did it intentionally but it's potentially very dangerous.

You don't think he did what intentionally?

He clearly chooses to take a different approach to tacking the player and deliberately moves his arm and hand up from underneath the players arm to take the player around the head. From behind the player, he puts his hand across the front of his head in the face area. And his hand stays over the player's face as he drags him down.

All of that is intentional by Ashton to achieve his objective of removing the player.

As to whether he made contact with the player's eye area in the process, it can't be seen on the camera angles provided so far.

Ashton clearly and intentionally dragged his hand across the Ulster players eyes. However the citing process in rugby union is so unpredictable anything could happen from a lifetime ban for Ashton to the Ulster player getting banned, this discipline procedure is bringing the game into disrepute!

You must have a superior video if it can tell you the intentions of the player!

by TJ Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:41 pm

I think Aston is intentional - its reckless at best but I think intentional. Just my opinion.

by **LondonTiger** Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:44 pm

TJ wrote:I think Aston is intentional - its reckless at best but I think intentional. Just my opinion.

You think he intended to put his hand in the players eyes?

Something that so far has not been proven of course.

by TJ Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:49 pm

Yes I do believe - but I accept it is not proven. For me to believe it to be so is (rightly) a lower standard of proof than the citing commission need. They need to be sure.

by **LondonTiger** Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:53 pm

Well everyone has an opinion I guess.

by Cyril Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:46 pm

The Ashton situation is a penalty but nothing more. Clumsy, sure. No other issue at all.

by rapidsnowman Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:01 am

Cyril wrote:The Ashton situation is a penalty but nothing more. Clumsy, sure. No other issue at all.

It was a rather clumsy attempt to remove his head.

Manu obviously didn't knock enough sense into Ashton after he had a cheap shot at him! boxing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSa9hAl1Lpo

by LordDowlais Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:09 am

Well a 14 week ban for Clermont flanker Viktor Kolelishvili seems to be a message, that you do not touch the officials, not matter what, I agree with this, I do not want to see rugby spiral into what football has become, I just hope that the powers to be a re consistent with this.

by Pete330v2 Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:29 am

Seagultaf wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:You cannot intentionally get in any way physical with a referee and that basic and simple area of respect must be maintained at all costs which is why Kolelishvili got such a harsh ban. If we allow respect to be chipped away even slightly eventually we end up with players in refs faces just like soccer so we can never allow any erosion of values.
I agree with you Notch in that the act itself didn't warrant the player being sent off as it wasn't reckless and didn't endanger anyone. The citing commission has sent out a very clear and strong message for a change in protection of the sport's values so bravo to them.

I think that this ban is really harsh, Barnes is an experienced referee but he was standing in a position where he was obstructing the first defender. There are probably better ways for telling the ref to get out of the way, but I think that Barnes caused this problem by obstructing the defence. AWJ has it right get on with the game and keep out of the way of the defence.

I think to send the right message Kolelishvili should get a token one week ban.................and two weeks ban for Barnes!

Absolutely wrong!
You can tell the ref he's blocking you all you want but you cannot get physical with officials. There cannot be any grey areas here, it's very simple, you do not touch an official. Let one player away with it and that would open a can of worms we'd never close.
Leave the abuse of officials to the soccer fraternity, Rugby must be defended from to maintain the mutual respect that proudly keeps our sport the way it is.

by wayne Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:36 am

Pete330v2 wrote:
Seagultaf wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:You cannot intentionally get in any way physical with a referee and that basic and simple area of respect must be maintained at all costs which is why Kolelishvili got such a harsh ban. If we allow respect to be chipped away even slightly eventually we end up with players in refs faces just like soccer so we can never allow any erosion of values.
I agree with you Notch in that the act itself didn't warrant the player being sent off as it wasn't reckless and didn't endanger anyone. The citing commission has sent out a very clear and strong message for a change in protection of the sport's values so bravo to them.

I think that this ban is really harsh, Barnes is an experienced referee but he was standing in a position where he was obstructing the first defender. There are probably better ways for telling the ref to get out of the way, but I think that Barnes caused this problem by obstructing the defence. AWJ has it right get on with the game and keep out of the way of the defence.

I think to send the right message Kolelishvili should get a token one week ban.................and two weeks ban for Barnes!

Absolutely wrong!
You can tell the ref he's blocking you all you want but you cannot get physical with officials. There cannot be any grey areas here, it's very simple, you do not touch an official. Let one player away with it and that would open a can of worms we'd never close.
Leave the abuse of officials to the soccer fraternity, Rugby must be defended from to maintain the mutual respect that proudly keeps our sport the way it is.

You are quite right Pete, I thought it very funny on the highlights show on Sky on Sunday night, that they mentioned that Neil Back agreed with Barnes assessment, considering he did the same thing and got a 6 month ban, he wants standards to slip, I do not.

by beshocked Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:46 am

Pot Hale of course I don't think it's intentional. It's common knowledge that Ashton at times gets his technique wrong. In this particular incident it's clear he's trying to drag Marshall out of the way, I don't think his intention was for his hand to be in his face.

What I feel baffling is why can't Ashton sort his technique, it's not hard, don't go for the head, wrap hands round the opposition body. It's as if he can't be bothered to tackle the man properly at times.

Watch the incident in real time as well as slow mo. Slow mo makes everything look worse. In real time I genuinely don't think Ashton was thinking about gouging Marshall. Pushing him out of the way yes but no more.

rapidsnowman don't bring the Tuilagi incident into this.

Tuilagi took out Ashton off the ball a bit high too, Ashton reacted badly to this and pushed Tuilagi.

Tuilagi then punched Ashton. Neither player did their reputations any good but Tuilagi was more of a plonker on that particular day.

by Scottrf Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:00 am

Pete330v2 wrote:Absolutely wrong!
You can tell the ref he's blocking you all you want but you cannot get physical with officials. There cannot be any grey areas here, it's very simple, you do not touch an official. Let one player away with it and that would open a can of worms we'd never close.
Leave the abuse of officials to the soccer fraternity, Rugby must be defended from to maintain the mutual respect that proudly keeps our sport the way it is.

The cheap shots at football are a bit tiresome. Does football have a similar incident list to rugby from this weekend?

by rapidsnowman Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:02 am

beshocked

no it isn't in least bit relevant I agree - it was a poor attempt at humour Run

.

However, Pot Hale is correct in pointing out Ashton deliberately moves his grip up from around Marshall's waist/torso to his head - making contact with the face/eye area inevitable.

I don't think he tried to gouge him. But he left himself wide open to that accusation.

by Pete330v2 Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:28 am

Scottrf wrote:
Pete330v2 wrote:Absolutely wrong!
You can tell the ref he's blocking you all you want but you cannot get physical with officials. There cannot be any grey areas here, it's very simple, you do not touch an official. Let one player away with it and that would open a can of worms we'd never close.
Leave the abuse of officials to the soccer fraternity, Rugby must be defended from to maintain the mutual respect that proudly keeps our sport the way it is.
The cheap shots at football are a bit tiresome. Does football have a similar incident list to rugby from this weekend?

The abuse of officials in soccer is institutionalized and happens all the time be it verbal or physical. I don't need to make cheap shots at soccer, it looks after that itself. The soccer authorities don't have a citing process anything like rugby so what would you suggest I list?

by Sponsored content