Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: AP (IP Logged)
Date: 05 October, 2017 08:28

Fatheralice, in justifying yourself you also defeat your own argument - the law states that the 50% reduction is not automatic and is the maximum allowed.Indeed, it is not the starting point but is the cap. However, in practice it seems pretty automatic as you say!

I wonder if there is confusion in the various reports and comments between "deliberate" and "intentional". The panel found it was an "intentional action" and Sinckler said "More importantly I feel terrible that anyone would think I would deliberately gouge an opponent. That was never my intention - it was a genuine mistake and an act of recklessness on my part."

That's not necessarily inconsistent - if he intended to put his hand in or towards someone's face but did not intend to make eye contact, then it was an intentional and reckless action but not a deliberate gouging.

Whatever, he was an extremely silly boy, as his statement acknowledges.



Successful hills are here to stay
Everything must be this way
Gentle streets where people play
Welcome to the Soft Parade

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: TonyTaff (IP Logged)
Date: 05 October, 2017 16:35

Many people on this board are aware that the maximum discount for mitigating factors is 50%, and some reacted to Father Alice's original statement before he/she qualified it.

Ask Alice, when she's ten feet tall!



£630.67 (*) donated to the Saracens Foundation due to visits to the Sarries frontpage [www.rugbynetwork.net]

Please read and submit articles for publication. (*) As at October 31, 2016.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: The Bard (IP Logged)
Date: 05 October, 2017 17:05

It's become a bit like a witchcraft trial, where you either plead guilty or face the ducking stool and drown.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: JO'G (IP Logged)
Date: 05 October, 2017 19:07

The thing that annoys me about this whole judgement is that Sinkler pleads guilty to get the reduction and immediately goes to the press and says it wasn't intentional which was the finding of the board

This comment basically negates his guilty plea - so get that reduction removed



Park team from London
Just a park team from London
European Champions
Just European champions

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Quinten Poulsen (IP Logged)
Date: 05 October, 2017 22:00

Regardless of what people say after the event I think it's a silly reduction on serious offences like these. I think having a reduction when a player has a good previous record is okay, but 50% is way too much in general.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Roger G (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 06:40

IMHO a guilty plea should just be a way of shortening proceedings and saving legal costs for all parties. I don't see why it should be a mitigating factor when it comes to the punishment, which should be judged on the severity of the offence (whatever the plea). Reductions for previous good character, or other potentially mitigating factors, are an entirely different matter.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: TOKS (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 08:49

Quote:
JO'G
The thing that annoys me about this whole judgement is that Sinkler pleads guilty to get the reduction and immediately goes to the press and says it wasn't intentional which was the finding of the board
This comment basically negates his guilty plea - so get that reduction removed

Read the actual judgment, Jeremy (available on the Quins board) and you will be even more annoyed.

The inconsistency of disciplinary committees is one of the (few) areas where Rugby Union really lets itself down.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Quinten Poulsen (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 09:30

Which particular inconsistencies?

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: TOKS (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 10:48

Quote:
Quinten Poulsen
Which particular inconsistencies?

Well done people! I was afraid someone was going to take the bait!

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Man from LA (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 11:37

Fair play to Sinckler, at least he owned up to breaking the rules. Better that than pretending it never happened even when everyone can see rules have been broken.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Quinten Poulsen (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 15:44

Quote:
TOKS
Quote:
Quinten Poulsen
Which particular inconsistencies?

Well done people! I was afraid someone was going to take the bait!

Just to be clear - did you have any inconsistencies in mind or did you just post it so that someone would ask a question about it?

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: TOKS (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 16:11

I did have inconsistencies in mind, QP, and if you think really really hard you could probably make an informed guess as to which ones they are.

You make several good points and are always welcome on this board. Unfortunately we have a slight male chicken problem at the moment, both of whom have raised their beak during this thread, and hopefully will disappear soon. Please don't allow yourself to get tarred with the same brush as your views are always welcome.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Sara'sman (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 16:22

Quote:
Man from LA
Fair play to Sinckler, at least he owned up to breaking the rules. Better that than pretending it never happened even when everyone can see rules have been broken.

Nope. I think you'll find he pleaded guilty because of the irrefutable evidence in order to get his suspension reduced and has been claiming innocence ever since the judgement - have a look at the Quins site. Back to the LA for you before the white coats spot your absence.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Innings (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 17:38

As I understand it, KS denied the action immediately after the game. His coach, JK, swallowed that story and stood by his man. KS pleaded guilty, kept his hands off the biscuits and was given the minimum possible sentence. The panel decides that the action was deliberate, whilst KS leaves the hearing protesting his innocence.

World Rugby's charter document opens with just exactly five words set out on the first page. The first is INTEGRITY, the last is RESPECT. Perhaps neither of these individuals has ever read the charter, perhaps it doesn't apply to the way they see the game.



Innings

Points win matches: tries win hearts and minds.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Adey (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 19:19

Quote:
Quinten Poulsen
Quote:
TOKS
Quote:
Quinten Poulsen
Which particular inconsistencies?

Well done people! I was afraid someone was going to take the bait!

Just to be clear - did you have any inconsistencies in mind or did you just post it so that someone would ask a question about it?

Because TOSS said so QP. Itís also noted that every time he has a dig at someone he brings up male genitalia. The man is obsessed with it. You might say he canít get enough of it.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Sara'sman (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 19:41

Adey - your cynicism/realism could be a real asset to our board, reigning back our more myopic/excessive posts, balancing our tendency to get carried away by our support for our team. May I ask that you think about the tone of your posts? Please consider presenting your viewpoint in a less confrontational manner. And avoid personal insults whatever the perceived provocation - something I'm not always good at doing!

This is generally a friendly, welcoming board with very few ongoing arguments. I'd hate to see it degenerate to a clone of the Quins board. Please have a look at TOK's reply to QP as an example of how to make balanced posts.

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Adey (IP Logged)
Date: 06 October, 2017 20:32

Quote:
Sara'sman
Adey - your cynicism/realism could be a real asset to our board, reigning back our more myopic/excessive posts, balancing our tendency to get carried away by our support for our team. May I ask that you think about the tone of your posts? Please consider presenting your viewpoint in a less confrontational manner. And avoid personal insults whatever the perceived provocation - something I'm not always good at doing!
This is generally a friendly, welcoming board with very few ongoing arguments. I'd hate to see it degenerate to a clone of the Quins board. Please have a look at TOK's reply to QP as an example of how to make balanced posts.

The reply to QP was noted when I made my comment.

As Iíve said before TOSS bangs his Ďno one likes us and we donít careí drum. But when anyone says anything he doesnít agree with or questions anything Sarries his toys come out the pram and he start name calling (which is bizarrely always penis related.)

Re: More Gouging?
Posted by: Quinten Poulsen (IP Logged)
Date: 07 October, 2017 07:13

Quote:
TOKS
I did have inconsistencies in mind, QP, and if you think really really hard you could probably make an informed guess as to which ones they are.
You make several good points and are always welcome on this board. Unfortunately we have a slight male chicken problem at the moment, both of whom have raised their beak during this thread, and hopefully will disappear soon. Please don't allow yourself to get tarred with the same brush as your views are always welcome.

Er, what? Stick to the topic please.

Current Page: 2 of 2
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net