The RugbyRebels Messageboard
http://rugbyrebels.co.uk/
Nor I. That really is blatant, isn't it?Mikey Brown wrote:Only just seen the Parkes tackle. I wasn't expecting it to be such a clear red as this.
Quite. I ought to hate the bloke but, for some weird reason, I quite like him. Good player, of course, in his day.Freddo wrote:AWJ saying you can't talk to the referees any more. He never fucking stops!
I'd say that it was degradation. It was intended to humiliate and embarrass as most bum pinching and the like is. It's also likely to be a source of embarrassment for pretty much all of recorded time. 12 weeks does not seem massively excessive, though it's out of kilter with the rather pathetic bans that get handed out for outright violence.Which Tyler wrote:I'm really not sure where I stand on this one. But it won't be alongside the internet hard-men looking to show how toxicly masculine they are.
On the one hand, it was clearly intended as a joke; and was clearly the equivalent of a friendly punch on the arm, as opposed to the Tyson-Roundhouse that some are equating it to.
On the other hand, it wasn't funny, but was badly misjudged.
It's technically sexual assault in the post #MeToo era, even though it wasn't for the purpose of sexual gratification, degradation or control.
Finally, this happened in a televised match, with dozens of cameras; and the rugby worlds second most prestigious event.
Those "mitigations" also end up not mattering one jot. "It's just a joke" "intent" "purpose" only matter if everyone involved thinks of it that way - otherwise it's bullying / assault.
He absolutely deserves a ban - for sheer dumb stupidity if nothing else. I simply don't know how much of a ban "feels" right. 12 weeks seems unproportionately harsh for something that so clearly WAS intended in jest. On the other hand, sexual assault is a erm... dodgy area to jest in, whilst rugby laws don't really differentiate between "done in jest" and "done with malicious intent".
It could viably be seen as anything from "a joke between Lions team mates" to "sexual assault". One requires a slap on the wrist for misjudging the timing / publicity; the other deserves a custodial sentence and his name on a register. Neither seems "right"
Ultimately, I guess I'll judge my outrage by AWJ's reaction
Agreed about the bans and would add the lack of any action over Parkes tackle, the upending of Curry, Williams taking of Dalys arm when jumping for a ball and Ryans Exocet entries to the rucks in the Eng v Ire game.Eugene Wrayburn wrote: I'd say that it was degradation. It was intended to humiliate and embarrass as most bum pinching and the like is. It's also likely to be a source of embarrassment for pretty much all of recorded time. 12 weeks does not seem massively excessive, though it's out of kilter with the rather pathetic bans that get handed out for outright violence.
Don't think that was a red for Parkes (Manu definitely dips and angles into him), however Williams 'swinging arm'' should have been looked atMikey Brown wrote:Only just seen the Parkes tackle. I wasn't expecting it to be such a clear red as this.
Your wish:Peej wrote:Does anyone have a clip of the Lawes one? I completely missed it
Eugene Wrayburn wrote:I'd say that it was degradation. It was intended to humiliate and embarrass as most bum pinching and the like is. It's also likely to be a source of embarrassment for pretty much all of recorded time. 12 weeks does not seem massively excessive, though it's out of kilter with the rather pathetic bans that get handed out for outright violence.Which Tyler wrote:I'm really not sure where I stand on this one. But it won't be alongside the internet hard-men looking to show how toxicly masculine they are.
On the one hand, it was clearly intended as a joke; and was clearly the equivalent of a friendly punch on the arm, as opposed to the Tyson-Roundhouse that some are equating it to.
On the other hand, it wasn't funny, but was badly misjudged.
It's technically sexual assault in the post #MeToo era, even though it wasn't for the purpose of sexual gratification, degradation or control.
Finally, this happened in a televised match, with dozens of cameras; and the rugby worlds second most prestigious event.
Those "mitigations" also end up not mattering one jot. "It's just a joke" "intent" "purpose" only matter if everyone involved thinks of it that way - otherwise it's bullying / assault.
He absolutely deserves a ban - for sheer dumb stupidity if nothing else. I simply don't know how much of a ban "feels" right. 12 weeks seems unproportionately harsh for something that so clearly WAS intended in jest. On the other hand, sexual assault is a erm... dodgy area to jest in, whilst rugby laws don't really differentiate between "done in jest" and "done with malicious intent".
It could viably be seen as anything from "a joke between Lions team mates" to "sexual assault". One requires a slap on the wrist for misjudging the timing / publicity; the other deserves a custodial sentence and his name on a register. Neither seems "right"
Ultimately, I guess I'll judge my outrage by AWJ's reaction
Quick somebody -- grab his bollocks and give the oul fella a nostalgia trip!oldbackrow wrote:A bit of a rant I know and apologise in advance!
I realise how much of a dinosaur I am but I played a game which was steeped in a ribald sense of humour, both on and off the pitch, childish antics on tour and inappropriate songs like Good Ship Venus, Eskimo Nell and hand gestures and word changes to everything from nursery rhymes to hymns!
Now it's a professional game where grown adults, who are highly trained muscular athletes, smash into each other for 80 minutes.
The outcry from social media the press and even AWJ over Marlers antics makes me despair at what society sees as acceptable. Much as I find any form of degradation (coming from an Anglo Carribean heritage this is all a shame really. Oh well life moves on.
Rant over.
Entry level was 12 weeks. Knocked a bit off for the fairly minor nature of it and a week back on for previous record.Scrumhead wrote:Lawes is off without punishment.
10wks is pretty harsh IMO, but at least it’s not the lifetime ban or some of the other insane $hit I’ve seen flying around.
Seems a bit disproportionate to a 3 week ban for stamping on someone's head that the South African got.Sandydragon wrote:Entry level was 12 weeks. Knocked a bit off for the fairly minor nature of it and a week back on for previous record.Scrumhead wrote:Lawes is off without punishment.
10wks is pretty harsh IMO, but at least it’s not the lifetime ban or some of the other insane $hit I’ve seen flying around.
Compared to a very solid punch to the face it looks disproportionate. Then again, I can see how its also appropriate.