What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.

Just announced on Sky - free to play 2 Nov.

flip it

No alcohol for January. I'm a dryathlete in aid of cancer research.

Dryathlon

Cor blimey did not see that coming. Speechless....

I think many of us did see it coming

Have to be honest, about 20 less that I was expecting. It was always going to be a case of if guilty or if pleading guilty (as he apparently did) that a hefty book would be thrown.

I thought 16 to ban him for the season and summer internationals. Clearly I was drastically wrong. That must rank amongst the longest bans?

It's done now.....He has his punishment, lets move forward and hope CC comes out the other side a better player/person

Let's be honest he deserves it. Calum made a big mistake and it's hard to defend his actions. He knows what he did and will be gutted and regretful.

Dear Jim -

I don't know if you read this TOSH, but may I make a suggestion?

I think it might be areally good idea for lots of reasons if Calum was told to do some travelling in some of the less obvious parts of the rugby world while he serves his punishment

Go to places where people don't know him, where priorities are different, maybe where life is a little bit more difficult - do some coaching, see life from a different angle, do some growing up out of the microscope's view.

"Your days are numbered. Use them to throw open the windows of your soul to the sun. If you do not, the sun will soon set, and you with it."

-- Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor 161-180 A.D.

The ban's in the range I was expecting, albeit at the lower end of that range.

I like Paul's idea - why not make the time out a time for some 'community service'?

He is extremely lucky. Go to most forums round the world and people think he should have been banned for years, perhaps even for ever. Worst thing I have ever seen on a rugby field, he had better hope Hawkins is able to play again or the sanctions are going to get very costly!!!!

Lot of free spaces under bridges tonight I fear...

PP - what is your expertise in this field? Who here has suggested it was lucky?

"Your days are numbered. Use them to throw open the windows of your soul to the sun. If you do not, the sun will soon set, and you with it."

-- Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor 161-180 A.D.

He's got pretty much what he deserved. If this had been a Saints player having his arm broken by a player from another team, we'd have a gibbet put up in the car park at FG and be selling tickets.

Maybe this will make Calum take a look at his attitude, he's played on the edge in his time both at Saints and Leeds, but he's overstepped it a few too many times. Use this as a way to improve yourself, Calum.

Photo Gallery

Very good post Paul,this will either make or break the lad, there will be no way back from this if the wrong option is taken and a new path not taken or strayed from.
Someone must know a Kiwi farm or Gaucho ranch.He has made his bed and now has to get out of it.

In the old school world before the citing police took over, anyone who regularly became involved in anything a bit seriously iffy, always seemed to get their dues with a big lesson at the bottom of a ruck or got their just rewards from the real hard men of the game.

Hope he can turn things round and we can get an East Mids final for the end of the season.

A well respected ex-player told me it was a 'bit of old school' a few days after the incident. A far different attitude from the likes of PP and others on here who clearly come from the 'PC school'.

I think he has been made an example of and as such can count himself a little unlucky.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012:03:29:21:07:04 by Whiston Saint.

Mark you say Calum pleaded guilty but guilty to what charge?

I am afraid he got what he deserved.
Flattie makes a very good point-the punishment alone cannot and should not be enough-some form of atonement is required for his future rehabilitation.

The 'real hard men of the game' Gaffa, got their reputations by and large from doing things they shouldn't too. This notion that their was some age of chivalry in rugby is a fantasy.

Thats not for a moment condoning Calums actions, he deserves the ban.

According to Sky Damon, guilty to hyperextending Hawkins' arm. Full judgement published tomorrow.

i'm with you Whiston seems excessive to me. arms and legs are fair game in freeing the ball in every ruck rightly or wrongly, he used excessive force after the whistle and deserves a ban, not 32 weeks imo

Quote:

numberseven
some form of atonement is required for his future rehabilitation.

I think it is going to be very difficult for him to ever go on a Premiership rugby field again. The fact that he will have served his time will not and does not now satisfy people and to some extent that I can understand.
Folks are still dragging up the Dylan incident from 5 years ago, aided and abetted by the media who delight in mentioning it ad infinitum. He (CC) will be the target of all kinds of vitriol from the terraces and no doubt cheap shots on the field.
Perhaps a change of club would be best for all concerned and as stated previously somewhere in Patagonia or South Island will be ideal?

Perhaps the club may sanction him too. I wonder if he will be on his £xxxxx per month wages. Can't say I'm surprised. Hope we can just move forward to the rest of the season now. Feel sorry for him in some ways as he may be primarily remembered for this now as opposed to his ability.

I think that the kind of people who are getting hysterical over this will be distracted by some shiny thing or other well before the 32 weeks are up. Remember Matt Stevens, who did coke and got two years? I didn't hear any boos at Twickenham recently.

Calum will be rehabilitated. He just needs not to beat himself up for the whole ban and as Paul Flatt says, to go and do something useful far, far away.

Steward at Tigers?

Chris,never said theirs "was some age of chivalry in rugby" but there was less slyness,diving and hiding behind a cloak, all in MHO of course.
Give me a front row bust up to the trips dives and acts that seem more common now. Anyway see some of you soon.

im not going to mention my views on the ban itself but would it be best to send Calum to the same people they sent Dylan as mentioned he does ride close to the edge, like many players past and present.

I'm thinking I'm in the minority here but I personally never want to see him in the green, black and gold ever again.

He's young enough to have a wake up call that will define his career. He also has the chance to turn his hand to looking at a career outside of rugby when he retires. If he has something else going on it may relax him he always seems a bit too on edge.

Thought you may want to see this

RFU Official Verdict here


Calum Clark disciplinary verdict
Thursday March 29, 2012
Issued by Nicol McClelland

CALUM CLARK of Northampton Saints was this evening suspended for 32 weeks for an act contrary to good sportsmanship - Law 10(4) (M)

Clark pleaded guilty to hyperextending the right arm of Leicester Tigers' Rob Hawkins during the LV= Cup final at Sixways on March 18.

The suspension will run from March 22 to the November 1. He is free to play again on November 2 2012.

Clark is ordered to pay hearing costs of £500.

The full judgement will be made available tomorrow. The player has the right to appeal.

Thank you Kath.

Bridesmaids no more.

Lots of tigers unhappy wanting the club to sue CC. No bothered about them but hope this doesn't cause too much (further?) bad feeling.

Quote:

andysaint
Lots of tigers unhappy wanting the club to sue CC. No bothered about them but hope this doesn't cause too much (further?) bad feeling.

Gosh, that's a surprise eh?

Quote:

numberseven
I am afraid he got what he deserved.
Flattie makes a very good point-the punishment alone cannot and should not be enough-some form of atonement is required for his future rehabilitation.

For deliberately injuring a player in this manner this appears to be a very lenient punishment. Wait & see what the full report says, he may well have offered or accepted some degree of atonement by means of community work or whatever. Personally I would never like to see him in a rugby shirt again, but if he is genuinely remorseful & willing to change then perhaps we can view him differently after he has served his ban. As St Francis mentioned, people are forgiving about Matt Stevens these days.

Time IS a great healer

Use the time wisely Calum, come back better for it and I hope Rob is back playing before you.

PS. I am a Newcastle supporter, not a Saints supporter trying to stick up for one of 'our' boys. No matter which club we support I think that if Calum doesn't learn from this & change his ways we would all be happy to see him dropped down a deep well & left there, but if he serves his sentence & comes out at the other end a truly reformed character then it is in the past & over with, we move on. There is no place in rugby for what Calum did, but there is no place in rugby for vigilante attitudes either.

Quote:

smitferbrainz
Perhaps the club may sanction him too. I wonder if he will be on his £xxxxx per month wages. Can't say I'm surprised. Hope we can just move forward to the rest of the season now. Feel sorry for him in some ways as he may be primarily remembered for this now as opposed to his ability.

To do that there would have to be some kind of clause in his contract catering for consequences of a player being banned. He is no different from any other employee in that respect. The club may have a procedure allowing them to vary a salary should the player be come unavailable as a result of a disciplnary ban.

He did something very bad and he's paying for it. For a professional rugby player to not be playing rugby for 6 months is a very hard thing to have to deal with and for someone as intense as Calum he will really be beating himself up about it. I hope he get some good advice on what to do with these months to make them constructive and useful.


The boy did bad but does that mean the rugby community should shun him? Does that mean he should never play for us again or never play in English rugby again?

Hands up who has never ever done anything in a red mist? Or in a temper? Hands up who has never ever done anything they immediately regretted?

It happens. And he is going to pay for it. Not just in the time he's out of the game but in many ways afterwards too.

I sincerely hope he takes time out to think about what he's done. Do some anger management like Dylan has done. And come back and face the inevitable flak he'll get, just as Dylan always does and hold his head high as a Saints player.

It's not the mistakes that make a man but the actions he does afterwards.

One of the worst actions I have ever seen on a rugby field.

Personally I believe the sentence is far too light but the decision has been made and that is it.

I hope the 8 months off give him time to think about his actions and get his head in the right place for when he comes back. Dylan - who's ban was too long who has improved no end over the last couple of years will hopefully give him a few pointers in the right direction.

Graeme

Quote:

smitferbrainz

Quote:

andysaint
Lots of tigers unhappy wanting the club to sue CC. No bothered about them but hope this doesn't cause too much (further?) bad feeling.

Gosh, that's a surprise eh?

Someone just piped up with damages between £100000 and £1 mil do they live in cloud cuckoo land?

Edited due do dodgy iPad spellchecker



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012:03:29:22:12:15 by andysaint.

If Hawkins loses his livelihood I would expect him to take action to recover his lost future earnings. I would have thought this would be a bigger concern than the 32 weeks suspension, and I might add, a very sad day for the future of Rugby and a good day for the future of the legal profession.

Lets hope this does not happen.

Fine words Monkey, there have been a few high profile players over the years that have served lengthy bans yet come back with a clean slate and got on with their life and job, one even captained England to a World Cup. Sadly though in this day and age no doubt the holier than thou trolls will still want their pound of flesh with interest everytime his name is mentioned. He's done the crime, let him serve the time.

* snip *



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012:03:29:22:46:28 by Purebob.

to quote an earlier post but with an opposite view i think that i am in a minority here. i want to see Calum back playing for the Saints as soon as possible.
has he done wrong? yes. i am sure that he was trying to intimidate/hurt Hawkins, did he go too far? by the resulting injury yes, but he did not intentionally break his arm. when Brian (the chiropractor) Lima did his infamous islander tackles they were so hard that they resulted in pain for the opposition but he did not try to intentionally break a bone. there is a fine line between hard play, reckless play and dirty play and i find it interesting how many people on this board, including many who have not even played the game at a good junior club standard, seem to be expert enough to know that Calum's was definite dirty play. it would be interesting to know what would be said if someone as famous as Richie McCaw ever injured someone because he often goes from the very hard to actual dirty play but without causing a bad injury his bad points are overlooked.
two points to end my rant on- both Dylan and Calum did what they did in the breakdown area which is the be all and end all of the game these days. when you could ruck players ala the all black way i don't recall these type of incidents happening perhaps the pc brigade who stopped old fashioned rucking have something to answer for.
secondly i find it amusing that Richard Cockerill who on occasion could be a dirty player is so quick to cast the first stone one week and then not see a case to answer (Youngs) the following week and even more amusing who is the citing officer for the Youngs incident none other than Wade Dooley, well he would be an expert on dirty play wouldn't he?

Monkey 1 you and I are saying the same thing, and if there is not a process of atonement that CC completely buys into then I am in the camp that doesn`t want to see the guy in a shirt again-GBG or any other.
I have to say I didn`t see this form of "accident" coming, but I have, for some time, been concerned about his body language at certain times in matches.

Rugby, as we all know, has to be about controlled aggression, otherwise its mayhem.

Errrhmm.
Stevens just 'injured' himself and by implication, the reputation of Bath Rugby. He did not deliberately injure another player on the pitch to the extent that he will be injured for life, even if he does manage to get back into top class rugby again. No comparison. frankly.

Glad CC has got a hefty ban. Trust that like Stevens he listens to sound advice from people he can trust, and uses the time to turn his life around. Or is he still too arrogant to believe he did anything 'that wrong'?

Was he arrogant in the first place then Annie?

Quote:

annie blackthorn
Or is he still too arrogant to believe he did anything 'that wrong'?

Where's the evidence for him being arrogant? Has he commented?

Quote:

annie blackthorn
Errrhmm.
Stevens just 'injured' himself and by implication, the reputation of Bath Rugby. He did not deliberately injure another player on the pitch to the extent that he will be injured for life, even if he does manage to get back into top class rugby again. No comparison. frankly.

Nobody is comparing what they did Annie, it was just an example of how a player who was once in disgrace is now accepted again.

to compare Youngs slapping someone for cheating cannot be compared to deliberately and recklessly breaking the arm of a player who was on his feet competing for the ball legitimately, with the tackled player holding on.

Why inflict this miscreant on some poor 'under-developed' part of the world-wide rugby family?

Patronising tosh...

What should we do then Shawshank? Hang him?

Unrealistic tosh.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012:03:29:22:39:13 by SarahH.

you can't really compare slapping to use of a knee and punching either can you? reckless i agree totally but deliberate i never will

worse thing ever seen on a rugby field. really?? pokes in the eye, punches, kicks, headbuts, happen up and down the country at all levels every week and have done for years. playing club rugby in the 70's amd 80's was very interesting at times. he was excessive and was unlucky Hawkins suffered an injury and deserves a ban.

Umaga and pal deliberately injuring O'Driscoll on Lions tour with no censure, burger poking another lion in the eye, i could go on. reality check required i think, it is rugby after all

For those mentioning the possibility of Hawkins seeking compensation here is an article in Planet Rugby on Rougerie suing Phil Greening and Wasps.

Planet Rugby.

Rougerie of course is still playing so if (worst case) Hawkins is unable to resume his career then I would expect any compensation to be considerably higher than €40,000.

“This machine kills fascists�
Woody Guthrie's guitar.

I hope now the judgement is out there will be some kind of public apology from Callum to Rob. That would then end the matter in my view.

Two incidents, yes they are totally different, in one no one at that players club condones his actions and virtually all agree on length of ban, in the other...

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king, and boy oh boy will we see that over the next 24 hrs or so on here.

Really Duncan, is there a precedent for this? You'd like to think its already happened behind closed doors wouldn't you.
Not sure I remember in a long list of miscreants over the years anybody having to make a public apology, why is this different?

All those of you brave, affronted and clearly incredibly knowledgeable keyboard heroes who are accusing him of being guilty of not getting a long enough ban or not having committed hari-kari, please wait until the report is published. On the BBC tonight James Burridge, reporting on the ban, said that the panel had not found any INTENT.

Clearly, he deserved a long ban for an incredibly stupid and as it turned out, dangerous, act.

I believe the club will attempt a rehabilitation, and seek atonement , because not only is that the right thing to do, but that is in the ethos of the coaching staff.

IF the RFU report confirms what Mr Burridge has reported tonight, perhaps those who have been calling his intent deliberate may just like to wind their necks in and be temperate until the report is published.

David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

Of course they will not David, they know better, they've seen different evidence and talked to different witnesses! And of course it might leave them with one less thing to get self righteous and indignant about.

I know that Chris but I thought this was a holier than though competition!

And I am considerably holier than yow!

David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

There's a comment posted on the Offy regarding the no intent point and they're clearly considering an appeal.

Offy Statement

And perhaps it needs mentioning again before the next batch rush in, no one here is condoning Calums actions, so please bear that it mind before you start lecturing us like children on the evils of your perceived world. Thank you.

Firstly, will we ever find out what Hawkins injury was? You cannot break your elbow! Too much ill informed gossip around a contentious event. Calum has been found guilty of hyper extending Hawkins elbow which may have led to ligament damage and or fracture of one of 3 bones that make up the joint. I wish him a speedy recovery.
It was reckless and a single moment in time whilst playing a contact sport we all say we love.Everyone has their opinion but now get off his back. He knows what happened and is paying the price. He is and still will be a Saints player and are we in a world with no second chances? I look forward to welcoming back a more thoughtful Calum Clark in November
Thank you to all the one time posters that are holier-than-thou. COYS

Just signed up to make a point. I have always found saints fans to be top notch whenever we have played them. And up till a few years ago had great respect for the club. However for the last few years there has been a undercurrent of thuggery creeping in. Mainly down to a small group of players. Unfortunately they are for the most part senior internationals. Hartley Ashton lawes and now Clarke. While no club is perfect, their behaviour seems to be tolerated as the norm. While the players are responsible for their actions, management and fans are responsible for the ethos and image of the club. It has been clear for a while now that the coaching staff have at least turned a blind eye to it. For the sake of the club I hope it wasn't a recommended tactic. The image of the club has been getting progressively worse as a result. I have no doubt if the Clark incident hadn't occurred, the recent attitude towards this club would have just been a blip and respect would have been regained as these players matured or left.
Unfortunately for the club, the fans and Hawkins, Clark went into a ruck after the whistle, punched a man on the ground and then caught his arm and wrenched it back, levering it over his own body. I am not going to argue these points. It is clear from the video this is what occurred and it was intentional. No one except Clark will ever know if he intended to break the arm, but he categorically intended to do damage. It was a disgusting act and he deserves to be banned for a lot longer than he received.
I know for a fact this behaviour wouldn't be tolerlated in the club I support. Management, the players and fans would all have put their hands up and said fair is fair he acted like a dick and let all of us down, he deserves his punishment and hopefully learns from it and doesn't do it again. I would expect the same reaction from most clubs.
The most disgusting and disappointing side to the whole affair is the reaction of fans and management to the incident. I fear the image of this club will never recover. The comments that have appeared on here and other forums defending Clark whilst attacking, other players, clubs and fans have been disgusting, for example i have seen comments cynically attacking leicester for giving hawkins a new contract! Northampton Fans have criticised the condemnation on leicesters forum, have ye not realised this isn't confined to a northampton leicester @#$%& for tat. On every almost every rugby forum world wide this incident is being condemned. The ugly comments from here and yere official forum have been quoted and discussed with horror. Ye now hold the mantle of most despised rugby team and fans worldwide.
I would suggest finding and reading all these comments and then do a bit of soul searching and ask yourself is this what I want to represent my club?

I suspect that Hawkins was lucky that a bone fractured, far easier to repair than major damage to tendons, ligaments and the like.

Intent should never come into it, everybody is going to deny intent whatever happened. He pleaded guilty, in my view that's it, intent is immaterial and certainly not grounds for an appeal.

Keyboard warriors, got to love them.

Not Calum's brightest moment. Ban is fully deserved, and the injury to Hawkins has been found to be not intentional. Anyone who still disagrees and considers Calum to have done it deliberately to cause harm is, in the eyes of the law, wrong. Let's move on.

Quote:

Disgusted1
Just signed up to make a point.

.... thank you, Tunbridge Wells. You have added immensely to the debate. Well, you typed a lot of words, anyway.

Quote:

Eif Jones
I suspect that Hawkins was lucky that a bone fractured, far easier to repair than major damage to tendons, ligaments and the like.
Intent should never come into it, everybody is going to deny intent whatever happened. He pleaded guilty, in my view that's it, intent is immaterial and certainly not grounds for an appeal.

Rob had a fracture addressed in surgery on monday but also required ligament reconstruction, unfortunately. Recovery time reassessed to be 3 to 5 months. Tigs medical staff say he may not be able to straighten his arm fully again.

Not great.

I don't like all this have a go at the fans. Are we on the pitch? No. Do we carry out the actions of other players? No. Do we tell players what to do? No. We love our club and will defend it in the face of unreasoned criticism as would any fan. I reject the point that there is an endemic problem here it s unfortunate that there has been a few high profile incidents but how many yellows and cites have we received in 4 years? I guess less than other clubs. I suspect disgusted1 is a troll and won't post again and will sit back and read the boards. I also fail understand what our management can do to stop these one off incidents. As far as I am concerned, t is the opposite, they have done a very good job with Dylan.

Not Calum's brightest moment.

Understatement of the week.

Anyone who still disagrees and considers Calum to have done it deliberately to cause harm is, in the eyes of the law, wrong.

Well if he didn't intend to cause harm, it was damn effective. Is he thick as well as vicious?

“This machine kills fascists�
Woody Guthrie's guitar.

Perhaps it should be tested "in the eyes of the law"

If this happened in non-professional rugby it is fair odds that plod would be involved. There is president for rugby players to have custodial sentences for assault on the pitch.

Quote:

Disgusted1
Unfortunately for the club, the fans and Hawkins, Clark went into a ruck after the whistle, punched a man on the ground and then caught his arm and wrenched it back, levering it over his own body. I am not going to argue these points. It is clear from the video this is what occurred and it was intentional. No one except Clark will ever know if he intended to break the arm, but he categorically intended to do damage. It was a disgusting act and he deserves to be banned for a lot longer than he received.

If the 1st part of this rant is what you saw, the good offices of Specsavers are close by.

I am glad you're not going to argue them because a debate with someone of your undoubted entrenched views would be tiresome.

It is clear from the findings of one of the toughest judges in this field that it was NOT intentional. I am sure the RFU welcomes your application for his position.

Quote:

Disingenious
The comments that have appeared on here and other forums defending Clark whilst attacking, other players, clubs and fans have been disgusting, for example i have seen comments cynically attacking leicester for giving hawkins a new contract!

You have seen none of that here

Quote:

Disbelievable
I would suggest finding and reading all these comments and then do a bit of soul searching and ask yourself is this what I want to represent my club?

Would suggest you take your anger and direct into a more factual reverie.

Post libellous rubbish like this on here again and you are banned.

Quote:

walks10
worse thing ever seen on a rugby field. really??
Umaga and pal deliberately injuring O'Driscoll on Lions tour with no censure, burger poking another lion in the eye, i could go on. reality check required i think, it is rugby after all

If you read the post again you will see that I said one of the worst ....

Interestingly I also compared it with the two incidents you referred to in your post.

Unfortunately you still appear to be living in the 70's and 80's. Having played at a decent level in the 80's I am quite aware of what went on a pitch - I now coach youth rugby and make sure things that happened then do not happen now.

Graeme

What concerns me is a wider issue here which is a continuing & perhaps growing problem with discipline on the pitch. This incident is one of the more extreme examples but how many times do we give away stupid penalties & incur yellow cards?

Whether you think Dylan & Calum are guilty/not guilty and/or lucky/unlucky is not my point. Our forward strength has been stripped by these suspensions added to the injuries we have to the extent that, given the rather tricky nature of our next 3 matches, we'll be lucky to make the play-offs & if we do, I wouldn't rush out & buy a ticket for Twickenham. And I suspect that some supporters at other clubs might be quite pleased about that...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012:03:30:08:06:17 by Gregor.

I think you have a valid point there Gregor.
Our discipline has been poor.

Not wishing in any way to say I have second sight, but a few weeks ago I posted expressing concern that jumping up and down in rage at a ref's decision was hardly mature or the act of a responsible captain.

I understand why Jim made him captain, but not sure that he was/is emotionally ready for leadership..

It is part of a wider breakdown in discipline, and is, I feel in part, down to the players not being in control of their game. (i.e. having different interpretations of confusing laws every week).

No excuses for poor discipline, but hard men need consistent laws or they will start to take the outcome into their own hands, which is bad news for everyone.

Not blaming refs, but the whole panoply of the game.

How many law changes in the last 3 years in Rugby?
How many in any other sport?

David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

Not trolling - honest, just popping over from LI.

I have to say I didn't see it first time, thought it looked bad the second time and thought it looked downright horrendous the third time I played the vid.

There is no doubt that Clark has "form", as some of the lurid videos from earlier years posted around these boards show. I would guess that he has anger / temper issues. He is only 22, for goodness sake.

Stevens seems to have cleaned up his act - good for him. Hartley seems to have done so too, after a gouging incident when he too was young (I think Ferris was fishooking him, FWIW). Clark seems to be a talented flanker with (as I said) some issues. I would genuinely hope that he takes a VERY long (at least 32 weeks!) hard look at himself, with the help of friends and Saints management and perhaps gets some help / therapy with whatever it is that causes the red mist to descend, for want of a better phrase.

The hope is therefore that he emerges as a more focused, controlled player, which will be better for him, for Saints and for the opposition's elf and safety! The best players are usually those who can control their aggression - some of you may remember Buck Shelford?

At the moment, IMHO Clark is a liability. If the ban causes him to reassess and to calm down, then well done him. The WORST thing he can do IMHO is get into a "the world is against me" attitude - he needs to recognise that he has done something very wrong, then go and sort himself out.

And I reckon he needs to make a full and sincere personal apology to Rob Hawkins (it needn't be public) as the first step in the process.

Just my halfpence worth - good luck for the rest of the season!

Alec from LI

I always love it when outher supporters come on here offering advice. As if none of us are capable of reason on our own.

Ironically, the most reasoned discussion on this topic has been had on here and on the Tigers board between Tigers and Northampton supporters.

I've offered my thoughts on this saga previously and won't repeat them. All that matters now is that an injustice was done and a punishment has been dealt. Lets take stock and move on and hope Rob Hawkins recovers fully and swiftly.

You can't always get what you want, But if you try sometimes well you might find, You get what you need.

Richards/Jagger

As I posted on the other thread, the most damning thing on this matter is the universal criticism from around the world of the incident. Aussies, Saffers, kiwis, paddies, welsh etc don't have axes to grind, nor for that matter do I. The complete failure of Mallinder and Saints to condemn the act (the suspension is a cynical move to mitigate any ban and we all know it) has been criticised nearly as much as the act itself. I would add that to compare a man developing a cocaine habit, serving a 2 year ban and having the guts to deal with it and a man breaking another man's arm after the whistle has been blown about 6 foot from him is symptomatic of the deep problems at Northampton saints. Wonder if Travis Perkins would be happy to see the footage of the incident replayed on the BBC 10 o'clock news?

The cynic in me would suggest it was good work by the RFU to move the hearing to the evening after Lancaster's appointment. A good time to bury bad news? Hope the BBC don't decide to run with the footage because it would be terrible for the image of rugby.

As I said last night StO some feel like they have to come here and lecture us like children, patronising in the extreme, indeed some are just making up things now to fit their spin, Disgusted1 being a prime example.

But just to make it clear for the indignant who jump in without reading what others had said first...

NO ONE HERE IS CONDONING CALUMS ACTIONS!!!

THE VAST MAJORITY ALSO AGREE WITH THE LENGTH OF THE BAN!!!

So please stick that in your Daily Mail leader writers pipe and bloody smoke it!

Quote:

Saint Owen
I always love it when outher supporters come on here offering advice. As if none of us are capable of reason on our own.

Actually, I didn't offer any of you advice - just offered my opinion, for what it is worth, which may be not a lot - who knows?

Oddly, the vast majority of Saints supporters I have met have been perfectly capable of reasoning for themselves, so your point is indeed correct, from my point of view.

I do suggest that you might like to get rid of some of the chippy "circle the wagons" mentality and remember that these messageboards were (last time I looked) for open, honest debate.

(That last paragraph, BTW, WAS offering you advice, Saint Owen).

Honestly - it's much more pleasant just to have a pint and a chinwag with you Saintly types at the Gardens and the MadStad twice a year than to try to offer an honest opinion on "your" messageboard. Your supporters (those that I have met) are welcoming, hospitable people. Pity your messageboard isn't similar.

I STILL wish you (even Owen) good luck for the rest of the season.

To be fair AlecW I wrote my comment before you posted yours.

But thanks for the insult.

You can't always get what you want, But if you try sometimes well you might find, You get what you need.

Richards/Jagger



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012:03:30:08:47:09 by St Owen.

Good god, now we've got conspiracy theorists too...

Mr Paddy, are you for real? Laughable, just laughable.

The hits on here must be climbing higher than petrol prices!

Bridesmaids no more.

Was there a citing hearing yesterday? Why hasn't anyone mentioned it?*

Bored now

Bridesmaids no more.

Quote:

ChrisG
Mr Paddy, are you for real? Laughable, just laughable.

What is laughable about it? Why was the hearing moved from lunchtime tuesday to thursday evening? I wasn't offering advise to supporters by the way if that criticism was levelled at me, I was suggesting that saints as a club need to come out with a slightly more reasoned and apologetic response because the reputation of the club around the rugby world is in free fall. Whether any of us like it or not, that is something which tends to interest sponsors. As I said, I hope the footage doesn't get anywhere near the BBC because it would do the image of rugby around the world an immeasurable disservice. You can think this is mindless trollery, BTW, but that would be even more indicative of an unhealthy atmosphere at Northampton Saints which would be a shame for a club with a great tradition.

Why would Jim come out with any condemnation before the hearing?

Bridesmaids no more.

Mr Paddy, laughable, not the subject matter, your spin on it. You're rant that there are deep problems at Northampton Saints is based on what? This one incident?

But yet again why not wrap this incident up in having a pop at the whole club eh?

Thats right, I am ranting!?! Trying to offer constructive criticism to a club which was a lot of neutral's second club. Good luck to you all.

To my mind one of the worst outcomes of the two recent hearings about Saints' players actions on the pitch is, I perceive, that the name of our great old rugby club is being dragged through the mud, not only in this country but around the world.

Whatever the rights and wrongs, the facts, the mis-conceptions, the prejudices, the name calling, the bile or the excuses, mud sticks and there's nothing anybody can do to stop it. Ultimately, two of our players, by their unlawful actions on the rugby pitch, have caused this situation. They can't undo what they did and in the course of time they will serve their punishments and we'll all move on, but the Club's reputation has been damaged and I find that immensely sad.

Quote:

Plastic Eejit
The cynic in me would suggest it was good work by the RFU to move the hearing to the evening after Lancaster's appointment. A good time to bury bad news? Hope the BBC don't decide to run with the footage because it would be terrible for the image of rugby.

Tell me that last time a hearing with Justice Blackett was held at any other tine than late afternoon early evening.

You are laughable - looking for conspiracy theories an lecturing us on what we should believe.

Quote:

confused of Reading
symptomatic of the deep problems at Northampton saints.

And these problems would be?…

You, course, being from another club would have intimate knowledge of these problems.

We await more of your pearls of wisdom.

not

David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

Constructive? Even funnier!

I am so impressed by the the opinions of those who have clearly never made a mistake in their own lives. We live by the consequences of our own actions and must take responsibility for them - Calum will hopefully do so. I've never met the player but he made a mistake, a bad one, he has received his punishment. Today is Day One of the rest of his rugby career should he choose to remain in the sport - I for one will support his actions from this day on and hope to see Messrs Clark and Hawkins back in action in due course next season.

I was expecting a longer ban and think Callum has got away lightly taking into account the summer break to.

Id like to think we won't appeal and just put the whole incident behind us and move on

N guys dont feed our guests... they love it, let them have their moment and ignore it

i challenge anyone to look at the shot of callum clark drinking water whilst cockrell is talking to him near the main stand touch line.Without even hearing the words callum clarks face tells it all for me.A terrible incident which he wholeheartedly regrets and would never knowingly do.But the incident happened and this has to be condoned,im suprised more injuries like this dont happen.LET US HOPE THIS INCIDENT DOESNT TAINT LOOMING LOCAL DERBY

Mallinder has no choice but to publicise the "no intent" concept even though he may feel there was, otherwise compensation for common assualt in the courts would be a much easier exercise.

IMHO it is regrettable that Saints are appealing but enevitable, they have no choice, particularly as Hawkins will possibly lose his livlihood and will have to seek compensation.

Quote:

Disgusted1
Northampton Fans have criticised the condemnation on leicesters forum,
On every almost every rugby forum world wide this incident is being condemned. The ugly comments from here and yere official forum have been quoted and discussed with horror. Ye now hold the mantle of most despised rugby team and fans worldwide.
I would suggest finding and reading all these comments and then do a bit of soul searching and ask yourself is this what I want to represent my club?

I would respectfully point you in the direction of the excellent first post on the Leicester Forum that I have linked below ...

Leicester Tigers Forum

"Ye now hold the mantle of most despised rugby team"

And in that first word I think we can work out where, or even probably who, 'Disgusted1' is...

Grannyg,
"IMHO it is regrettable that Saints are appealing but enevitable"
Blimey! They're THINKING ABOUT appealing.

It's quite amazing the number of untruths that get bandied about. And yours is by no means the worst.

Jealousy that's what it is. Saints are successful and they are eyed with envy by those fans whose clubs are less fortunate and when something comes along like Dylan and then ,like a No.42 bus coming in twos, we get CC. Then they are incandescant with their critism, rage and advice.

I feel sorry for the sperm banks,just think how much has been wasted over the keyboards in the last week or so.

On second thoughts, I'd rather not.

Sorry to not join in the whole "hang him" debate but couldn't let this go (and couldn't be bothered to check if anyone else had made the correction as this thread is out of control) but:

Quote:

TonyMay
to compare Youngs slapping someone for cheating cannot be compared to deliberately and recklessly breaking the arm of a player who was on his feet competing for the ball legitimately, with the tackled player holding on.

I'm pretty sure Hawkins was pinged for flopping over the ball. Tiny had made a break into the 22, Hawkins stopped Saints getting quick ball. Some refs would give yellow cards but that discussion has been had.

Everytime TF….Everytime

but as you say - discussion had.

Isn't wonderful how everybody is now posting as per Eif.

Take 20% truth
Mix with 50% opinion
add 30% conjecture

stir - publish with venom and self congratulation as a FACT on which to base further opinion

OFP had it about right -
I am in a battle of wits with unarmed opponents

David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

Isn't wonderful how everybody is not posting as per St Marlowe.

Whether contributors like it or not, the official Saints statement is about as constructive as the infamous recent Liverpool statement. Suarez didn't intend to be racist but was, Clark didn't intend to injure the guy but did. Intent is no defence and both clubs should have accepted that.

What's wrong with the statement Eif? They are going to have a logical and calm think about the length of the ban. Maybe look at similar judgements over the years and then come to a reasoned conclusion. Sounds good to me. Perhaps others could follow suit?

Neither of us are lawyers Eif
BUT
I suggest you discuss with a solicitor Eif (as I have) Intent has varying levels and will constitute an element of a defence.
see my post above re your ridiculous debating style

When you are wrong Eif - you are wrong

David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

Isn't wonderful how everybody is not posting as per St Eif.

Whether contributors like it or not, the official St Eif statement is about as constructive as the infamous recent St Eif statement. Rees was convicted on one mans evidence alone. Blindly ignoring the facts is no defence and St Eif should have accepted that.

Chris G...

Oh my days, reading this is genuinely quite upsetting. Not because of Calum's ban or Hawkins' elbow (I wish him all the best with his recovery) but because folk from other (read: lesser) clubs have decided in their infinite (jealous) wisdom to come to OUR board armed with little knowledge (and even less fact) to rant at our club because one of our players acted out of line with the laws.

Irish - Armitage (on how many occasions?)
Tigers - Tuilagi/Youngs/Murphy
Bath - Grewcock
Saracens - Stevens


Get your own house in order, when it is perfect come back and tell us what a mess our is. Until then, sling your hook!

Eif - i'm sure you dont ever intend to be constantly negative either, but you are

What a sad state of affairs. I hate being told how we should feel by other fans IMO those that do that are deliberate WUMs. Saints are no saints but how are we going to get over this unsavourary incident if the arguments continue. Rugby is supposed to be a decent family game where supporters interact with each other without trying to rip each others head off. We and other fans need to be more sensitive of others feelings when trawling other boards. Can we stop the fussing and the feuding now?

A genuine question here as I am confused.

What possible benefit does the released statement have? Would it have been better to have said nothing, or just “we're reviewing the judgement and have no comment to make at this time."

Or am i miss-reading it?

You can't always get what you want, But if you try sometimes well you might find, You get what you need.

Richards/Jagger

They were probably bombarded with requests for comments and referred the journos to one statment to feed on.

Andy

Life will indeed go on because 99% of those who watch games tomorrow will not be regular posters on these boards - sadly those of us who do, represent more than often the lunatic fringe counter-balanced to a small extent by the occasional
tinge of sanity.

Oh well, Barff here we come

Quote:

ChrisG
... Blindly ignoring ....

(Bad) pun intended, Chris, if you were referring to Rees' antics?!

Some of the comments above are quite disappointing and are the usual hyperbole on these occasions.

Intent, now that's a difficult one. Did Callum intend to break Hawkins elbow, very unlikely, did he intend to make it known to Hawkins his displeasure at killing the ball, most probably, and where do the lines cross between intent and effect.

To quote an example and one that has been discussed recently on another thread.

When Manu Tuilagi 'assualted' Chirs Ashton last year, did he intend to punch him with force in the head area, yes, did he intend to make a point to Ashton that he objected to being pushed in the back, yes, did he intend to knock Ashton out or off his feet, probably, did he intend to cause him brain damage or death, probably not, but that was a potential outcome of his actions.

So should disciplinary hearings be centred on intent, or injury.

Should disciplinary measures be put in place to prevent incidents like Clarke and Tuilagi from happening in the future.

Yes, and in the case of Clarkes punishment it sends out a signal.

What is disappointing is that it may take a player suffering severe brain damage before punching (of Tuilagi's nature) is considered a serious misdemeanour.

And that is not to make light of what Clarke has done, or to make a case for a longer punishment of Tuilagi, but to question whether intent or injury are the drivers for action.

Had Hawkins not had surgery this week on his elbow and faced rehab to return to the game would Clarke have got 32 weeks.

Had Ashton been left feeding from a straw for the rest of his life would Tuilagi have been banned for life.

Image of the game is another mute point. The Tuilagi incident was beamed round the world on TV's / internet etc but perhaps because it was punching that is still considered part of the game, whereas wrenching someone's arm is damaging to the image of the game.

I think the game in general could benefit from clarity on the IRB's / RFU's diciplinary processes and tariffs, otherwise every event like this feeds the trolls.

big bird. Excellent post.

Full report

But I am at work so haven't yet read it.

I commend the report to the hang 'im flog 'im brigade, those who know what they know, those who have visited us to tell us what to think of Callum, and Eif

David L

What if there were no hypothetical questions?

- Live wrong and preposterously

A full and fair assessment, which should go some way in shutting up, once and for all, all those 'in the know'

Some exerts:
Andrew Wallace, Elbow surgeon:
"I incised the flexor origin to expose the underlying medial collateral ligament. Fortunately this was intact, but I split it longitudinally to remove some small intra-articular fragments"

Callum Clarke

The Player said that Northampton had made a break and were on the ascendancy. He entered the ruck looking for a body to clear out but there was none so he looked for the ball. He found a player (Rob Hawkins) obstructing the ball. He first moved to place his hand on the ball and then the whistle blew. Hawkins’s had moved his hand back to the ball, and that prompted him to take action so Northampton could play quickly. He said: “I grabbed his arm to use as a lever to roll him away in desperation to win the ball. I was not fully aware of how vulnerable he was and that his body could not roll – mainly because another Northampton player was lying on top of him. I felt some resistance from his hand and continued to roll back. I pinned his arm to my chest and hyper extended his elbow. Never any intention for that to happen – I expected his body weight to follow him. Because of his position he was unable to move.” He continued: “I had realised what I had done – I put my hand to my mouth. I knew I was responsible and played rest of game in a fog. After game I was approached by their coach who made it clear what he thought. For me the result of the game was insignificant.”

HHHJB
"The offending was intentional. The Player clearly intended to pull Hawkins’ arm backwards after the whistle had been blown so that the ball became available and his side could play the ball quickly. I accept that he did not intend to harm Hawkins or cause him injury. I come to that conclusion because the Player is not known as one who commits foul play, and by the way he presented and expressed himself at the hearing. He is not a thug and presented as a genuine young man who was prepared to, and accepted, responsibility for his actions and their consequences."
"The incident took about 2 seconds and there was no premeditation"
"police intervention is unlikely as the Player did not have the requisite mens rea to have committed a criminal offence;"


Still, I won't let the facts get in the way of others fully informed rants...



Terrace 'B' next to Mav, Shaddo, AB, Jeremy and Spud.

Intent clearly matters a lot in this case, as you'll see from Hizzoner's notes in the report:

"Had there been any evidence that the Player intended to hurt an opponent (even if he did not mean to injure him) the appropriate entry point would have been in the order of five years’ suspension. That is not the case here, so the entry point can be considerably lower"

Ref last night's statement. As you will know, under the current playing management we very rarely put out a statement following a ruling.

However last night's statement was put out after comments made by Will Greenwood on The Rugby Club which totally contradicted the ruling made by Jeff Blackett, specifically about whether there had been an intent to injure.

Greenwood categorically said that there had.

Blackett in his ruling categorically said that there had been no intent to cause injury during the incident.

We made the latter point clear in order to minimise confusion.

Thanks, Chris.

Chris, thanks for the response. I appreciate it.

You can't always get what you want, But if you try sometimes well you might find, You get what you need.

Richards/Jagger

And a comment from Mr Greenwood now would be interesting.

Thanks Chris,I very much like how the club react to anything concerning the players since Jim 'n' Nobby arrived.It's how I would expect my employer to treat me.Whether it's citings,injuries or contracts,it's how it should be.A "need to know" basis.

Bridesmaids no more.

Quote:

Eddie P
Oh my days, reading this is genuinely quite upsetting. Not because of Calum's ban or Hawkins' elbow (I wish him all the best with his recovery) but because folk from other (read: lesser) clubs have decided in their infinite (jealous) wisdom to come to OUR board armed with little knowledge (and even less fact) to rant at our club because one of our players acted out of line with the laws.
Irish - Armitage (on how many occasions?)
Tigers - Tuilagi/Youngs/Murphy
Bath - Grewcock
Saracens - Stevens


Get your own house in order, when it is perfect come back and tell us what a mess our is. Until then, sling your hook!

What offence has Stevens committed whilst at Saracens ?

Graeme

Graeme, I think you can see the point. He went to Saracens after his ban for taking drugs. Can we drop this whole subject now?

TF

It is you that miss the point.

Eddie P refers to "lesser clubs", "little knowledge" "even less fact" "getting their house in order" and then refers to Stevens at Saracens.

Graeme

Yup, you're right, I'm wrong. Well done.

Although, if you want to carry on...

I didn't accuse anybody of missing a point. I said I think you can see the point.

And it should have been "misses"... ah forget about it. Have a good weekend.

Quote:

Toulousian Firefighter
And it should have been "misses"... ah forget about it. Have a good weekend.

I shouldn't try and read and type on a two inch screen.

Thanks - the weekend will be good - will enjoy being part of a special day at Wembley where hopefully we will be part of a record breaking crowd.

Graeme

So I get the last word then?



"Your days are numbered. Use them to throw open the windows of your soul to the sun. If you do not, the sun will soon set, and you with it."

-- Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor 161-180 A.D.

Quote:

Paul Flatt
So I get the last word then?

No!

----------------------------------------

Please sponsor me for Saints with Heart [www.justgiving.com]

If Mr Gleadell and his band of cheerleaders really find it it so tiresome that folks from outside their chummy wee circle come on here to post an opinion contrary to their own, why doesn't he take this MB off a PUBLIC site and run it privately...?

But its not opinion, as ever Shawshank you're another one that just comes here to stir the @#$%&, you're not contributing to the debate at all, you've just come to pick your usual fight, and now getting all uppity because nobody will bite and play your game. And i'll repeat again, no one is condoning Calums actions, don't you get that bit? Night, night.

QED...

Like I said, night night.

Mr Gleadell has nothing to do with the running of this site

and

As Mr shawshank has just discovered - contrary to his erroneous rantings this is not a Public site

So replace your head in your fundament Shawshank and go and play where somebody might actually care for your lack of style, wit and manners



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012:03:30:23:56:16 by COYS Admin.

No he isn't...

Graeme, my point was that all clubs have players who have done wrong.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012:03:31:09:37:30 by Eddie P.

Quote:

Graeme D
Thanks - the weekend will be good - will enjoy being part of a special day at Wembley where hopefully we will be part of a record breaking crowd.

Corrected.

I gave away my 2 free tickets. Ho hum.

So I get the last word, then.

_____________________________________________

The lowest depth to which people can sink before God is defined by the word 'journalist'.

Soren Kierkegaard

Nope.

"Your days are numbered. Use them to throw open the windows of your soul to the sun. If you do not, the sun will soon set, and you with it."

-- Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor 161-180 A.D.