[RWC]. Scotland's Ford and Gray citing

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
#1
As discussion (at length) elsewhere Scotland's Hooker Ford and lock Gray were banned for three weeks for making a dangerous tackle during the Pool B game. The pair won their appeal, and are cleared to face Australia.

:scot: "The players are therefore free to play again immediately."
 

RobLev

Rugby Club Member
#2
As discussion (at length) elsewhere Scotland's Hooker Ford and lock Gray were banned for three weeks for making a dangerous tackle during the Pool B game. The pair won their appeal, and are cleared to face Australia.

:scot: "The players are therefore free to play again immediately."
The appeal decision will make interesting reading.
 

leaguerefaus

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#4
Three weeks to zero... someone fu*ked up.

Edit: Just viewed the footage. Pretty clear the f-up was from the plonker who thought it was worth three weeks on the sidelines.
 
Last edited:

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#5
Three weeks to zero... someone fu*ked up.

Edit: Just viewed the footage. Pretty clear the f-up was from the plonker who thought it was worth three weeks on the sidelines.
Even Scotland Rugby thought the best they would do at the appeal was a reduction in weeks and not a complete let off, so there were people in their own organisation who accepted it could have warranted a RC.
http://www.punditarena.com/rugby/bb...caused-ross-ford-and-jonny-gray-to-be-banned/

Just looking at the footage again, wasn't there an argument that 7 white was facing his own DBL and had illegally gone into a position where he had his head and shoulders below his hips?
That's not what I'm seeing from that video.
He is there legally as a jackler, Ford and Gray lift his legs and force him into the ground. This is not driving a threat out of the tackle area as per a normal clear-out.
Just saying.....
 
Last edited:

menace

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#6
Well it looks like Ian_C was right and will soon be taking his seat to head up the judiciary...or adviser to the judiciary. I can almost see the smug look on his face while saying 'I told you so'.

It also shows what little I know about the world rugby and ARUs meaning of lifting players and driving their heads/necks into the ground. Apparently it's not dangerous at all! Now I'm scratching my head what to apply...:wtf::wtf:
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#7
Smug? Moi? Never!

I just know that what I saw did not look like a
RC offfence

I told you so will suffice. We shouldn't forget that JP told us so too
 

menace

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#8
Unless of course the appeal panel are Scots! :biggrin::sarc:

I'll get me coat......
 

irishref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/holland.p
#9
I'm a bit worried about the message being sent here. Player is upended and is dumped head first on the ground but now it's no offence.

The appeal will make for interesting reading.
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#10
The process seems to me to be more confused than ever. Twice the process has ended up with suspension for tackles that, following the 2009 memo were not RC offences. Now we have an incident that clearly, following the 2009 memo WAS a RC incident, but is unpunished

It's a bit of a mess. We clearly need a new memo, explaining exactly how these type of incidents are going to be assessed
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#11
The process seems to me to be more confused than ever. Twice the process has ended up with suspension for tackles that, following the 2009 memo were not RC offences. Now we have an incident that clearly, following the 2009 memo WAS a RC incident, but is unpunished
In your opinion. IMO, it clearly was NOT a RC offence.

You are obviously seeing what the JO saw

I am obviously seeing what the refeee, two ARs, the TMO and the appeals committee saw

impasse!
 

chbg

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#12
Even Scotland Rugby thought the best they would do at the appeal was a reduction in weeks and not a complete let off, so there were people in their own organisation who accepted it could have warranted a RC.
Just appropriate forelock-tugging so as not to antagonise the judiciary too much?
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#13
In your opinion. IMO, it clearly was NOT a RC offence.

You are obviously seeing what the JO saw

I am obviously seeing what the refeee, two ARs, the TMO and the appeals committee saw

impasse!
I just think we need a new memo. The 2009 one no longer seems in line with the decisions being made.
Putting all the decisions together, including this one, I am no longer confident that I can tell which offences, in the current eyes of JOs, merit a RC and which don't. I'd like a new memo that explains the current thinking
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#17
presumably it's just a temporary technical glitch .........

ALTHOUGH here's a funny thing - in the news report on RWC.COM on Gray and Ford appeal it says

The full appeal judgement will be published on www.rugbyworldcup.com as soon as possible.
which is odd they started off posting the judgements in the news reports on rugbyworldcup.com, then after a couple of weeks they switched over to a dedicated page on worldrugby.com. Perhaps they are reverting. Either way, lots of judgements are currently inaccessible. No doubt they'll be back soon
 

B52 REF

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#18
I was I.O (INDEPENDENT OBSERVER) for this - suggest you await appeal findings , "judicial" is stilll on website- just been updated with decisions so far and statement from WR. J.O. is a v.good Q.C.
 
Last edited: