Cian Healy cited

A forum for true blue Leinster supporters to talk about and support their team

Moderator: moderators

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby fourthirtythree » April 20th, 2017, 2:33 pm

One has to assume they took expert advice.

The lack of appeal doesn't surprise me. The current situation is an inevitable response to the lawyering up of those being cited and some of the silly short bans and successful appeals on procedural grounds. An appeals panel to this would be very reluctant to overturn a finding of fact from the original panel and would nearly always restrict itself to procedural fairness.

The alternative is you can take leinster players' heads off as long as you do it in Newport or Munster and the assaulting player is just fine to play next week. I know which I prefer. Not that it's ideal.
Datta: what have we given?
My friend, blood shaking my heart
The awful daring of a moment's surrender
Which an age of prudence can never retract
What the thunder said to Brian Lenihan
User avatar
fourthirtythree
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8454
Joined: April 12th, 2008, 11:33 pm
Location: Eight miles high

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby Peg Leg » April 20th, 2017, 2:43 pm

On the assumption that the panel got it right, Cian Healy's disciplinary record will not do him any favours in these instances.he needs to be careful in future.
"It was Mrs O'Leary's cow"
Daniel Sullivan
User avatar
Peg Leg
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 7885
Joined: February 1st, 2010, 6:08 pm
Location: Procrastinasia

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby artaneboy » April 20th, 2017, 5:25 pm

The Doc wrote:
the spoofer wrote:
Does anyone read what other people post here? My point is that judging actions on a rugby field purely on a quasi judicial basis is, in my opinion, bullshit as they have not been in that position. The murder analogy is bullshit also. At no stage did I even mention the sex of the panel and to have that constantly ascribed to me is further bullshit. Now I used that word three times deliberately.


Write a strongly worded letter to the Pro12 and World Rugby - though bear in mind that historically people have also considered it bullshit to have judgements passed by people who have no idea of rules of evidence, natural justice and proper process. Which is why rugby moved away from having "rugby people" on these panels to having professionals.

Having people who are familiar with BOTH legal principles and rugby could surely be both possible and beneficial; or am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Oh, I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused!"
User avatar
artaneboy
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: January 25th, 2011, 8:46 pm

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby simonokeeffe » April 20th, 2017, 6:40 pm

artaneboy wrote:
The Doc wrote:
the spoofer wrote:
Does anyone read what other people post here? My point is that judging actions on a rugby field purely on a quasi judicial basis is, in my opinion, bullshit as they have not been in that position. The murder analogy is bullshit also. At no stage did I even mention the sex of the panel and to have that constantly ascribed to me is further bullshit. Now I used that word three times deliberately.


Write a strongly worded letter to the Pro12 and World Rugby - though bear in mind that historically people have also considered it bullshit to have judgements passed by people who have no idea of rules of evidence, natural justice and proper process. Which is why rugby moved away from having "rugby people" on these panels to having professionals.

Having people who are familiar with BOTH legal principles and rugby could surely be both possible and beneficial; or am I missing something?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:idea:

an ex ref on the panel?
When he spreads his legs like that youd need dynamite or the Highland Light Infantry to shift him.
User avatar
simonokeeffe
Leo Cullen
 
Posts: 15611
Joined: July 21st, 2011, 3:04 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby The Doc » April 20th, 2017, 9:01 pm

artaneboy wrote:
The Doc wrote:
the spoofer wrote:
Does anyone read what other people post here? My point is that judging actions on a rugby field purely on a quasi judicial basis is, in my opinion, bullshit as they have not been in that position. The murder analogy is bullshit also. At no stage did I even mention the sex of the panel and to have that constantly ascribed to me is further bullshit. Now I used that word three times deliberately.


Write a strongly worded letter to the Pro12 and World Rugby - though bear in mind that historically people have also considered it bullshit to have judgements passed by people who have no idea of rules of evidence, natural justice and proper process. Which is why rugby moved away from having "rugby people" on these panels to having professionals.

Having people who are familiar with BOTH legal principles and rugby could surely be both possible and beneficial; or am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The population of ex pro rugby players who are now qualified barristers or judges is small.

Could have Brian Moore decide everything I guess but he's a little poorly right now.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role.
I've got nothing against your right leg.
The trouble is ... neither have you
The Doc
Mullet
 
Posts: 1493
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Cian Healy cited

Postby artaneboy » April 20th, 2017, 9:15 pm

simonokeeffe wrote:
artaneboy wrote:
The Doc wrote:[quote="the spoofer"]

Does anyone read what other people post here? My point is that judging actions on a rugby field purely on a quasi judicial basis is, in my opinion, bullshit as they have not been in that position. The murder analogy is bullshit also. At no stage did I even mention the sex of the panel and to have that constantly ascribed to me is further bullshit. Now I used that word three times deliberately.


Write a strongly worded letter to the Pro12 and World Rugby - though bear in mind that historically people have also considered it bullshit to have judgements passed by people who have no idea of rules of evidence, natural justice and proper process. Which is why rugby moved away from having "rugby people" on these panels to having professionals.

Having people who are familiar with BOTH legal principles and rugby could surely be both possible and beneficial; or am I missing something?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:idea:

an ex ref on the panel?[/quote]

There you have it! The joshing on the Ron Burgundy theme- it was funny, has muddied the issue.

It's not a gender thing; t's not even a legal thing- try tackling someone on the street and you'd get jail, it's understanding what happened in the context of both the laws of the sport and the dynamics of the match. What's reckless, what's reasonable care, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Oh, I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused!"
User avatar
artaneboy
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: January 25th, 2011, 8:46 pm

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby Ruckedtobits » April 20th, 2017, 11:36 pm

artaneboy wrote:
The Doc wrote:
the spoofer wrote:
Does anyone read what other people post here? My point is that judging actions on a rugby field purely on a quasi judicial basis is, in my opinion, bullshit as they have not been in that position. The murder analogy is bullshit also. At no stage did I even mention the sex of the panel and to have that constantly ascribed to me is further bullshit. Now I used that word three times deliberately.


Write a strongly worded letter to the Pro12 and World Rugby - though bear in mind that historically people have also considered it bullshit to have judgements passed by people who have no idea of rules of evidence, natural justice and proper process. Which is why rugby moved away from having "rugby people" on these panels to having professionals.

Having people who are familiar with BOTH legal principles and rugby could surely be both possible and beneficial; or am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Strongly suspect this is Pro12 protecting themselves against legal risk of being sued down the line. It certainly dilutes the capacity to make judgements about "intent" and / or "pre-meditation". For anybody who hasn't played or trained at serious level of rugby, not necessarily professional, many many actions in an intense rugby match look as if their is " intention to inflict......". If anybody doubts this they should read a few recent biographies of recently retired players from here or overseas.

Now, and including Citing Officials, the Disciplinary Process has gone over the top and become too PC, but largely I believe to limit liability for injuries to Players down the line.

This is the same path as the NFL and Coaches and Players will become tecnically more proficent at inflicting pain on opponents who are infringing and not being penalised.
Ruckedtobits
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2752
Joined: April 10th, 2011, 10:23 am

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby fourthirtythree » April 21st, 2017, 12:53 am

I can't get past the rampant capitalisation in that post: what's with the proper nouns?
Datta: what have we given?
My friend, blood shaking my heart
The awful daring of a moment's surrender
Which an age of prudence can never retract
What the thunder said to Brian Lenihan
User avatar
fourthirtythree
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8454
Joined: April 12th, 2008, 11:33 pm
Location: Eight miles high

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby enby » April 21st, 2017, 1:56 am

it should be obligatory for the Disciplinary Committee to publish online the video footage relied upon by it to issue a suspension of a player. It seems incredible that CH got a citing, let alone a ban, based on the clip that appears in this thread,
enby
Knowledgeable
 
Posts: 423
Joined: May 20th, 2011, 3:57 pm

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby Peg Leg » April 21st, 2017, 8:05 am

simonokeeffe wrote:
artaneboy wrote:
The Doc wrote:Write a strongly worded letter to the Pro12 and World Rugby - though bear in mind that historically people have also considered it bullshit to have judgements passed by people who have no idea of rules of evidence, natural justice and proper process. Which is why rugby moved away from having "rugby people" on these panels to having professionals.

Having people who are familiar with BOTH legal principles and rugby could surely be both possible and beneficial; or am I missing something?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


:idea:

an ex ref on the panel?


You would have to assume that the P12 do not want a judging panel with experience in anything other than disseminating facts from the evidence presented, the defence plea and the judging panel's interpretation of the laws applicable.
The result should be binary with severity of punishment the only subjective outcome.

Too often have we been at the hands of refs and TMO's who let teams away with a bit hear and there or have a different law interpretation for a day.

The laws are the laws. Proper enforcement is the only thing that will allow proper enforcement.
"It was Mrs O'Leary's cow"
Daniel Sullivan
User avatar
Peg Leg
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 7885
Joined: February 1st, 2010, 6:08 pm
Location: Procrastinasia

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby Timbit » April 21st, 2017, 8:21 am

I don't think it is necessary to have played rugby to a high level to understand if a player has, for instance, used their arms in a tackle; tackled around the neck; hit a player in the air; etc. Which is the issue at play when determining if an offence has taken place. Intention comes into play when sentencing and, it can be inferred, was not thought to apply here.

Nor do I think it is politically correct to ask professional rugby players to respect the laws of our game. It's a physical and dangerous game which has been codified to retain physicality while protecting the players.

Paulie, Ferris, Luke, all had to retire too early due to injuries sustained in normal play and the game was poorer for their loss. Why start losing players to illegal play as well? Look at Kearney coming off Saturday, it's awful that a guy who worked for months to get back on the pitch is off it again for months because of a cheap though likely unintentional shot. That should have been cited in my view. Papé is highly unlikely to have intended to break Heaslip's back but he transgressed the law and was, rightly, punished for it.

This is not political correctness, this is rugby.
Timbit
Beginner
 
Posts: 47
Joined: May 10th, 2016, 9:33 pm

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby kermischocolate » April 21st, 2017, 5:50 pm

Timbit wrote:
Nigel Owens never played serious rugby, Garces never played serious rugby? Should we assume they wouldn't know a clear out if they saw one?


Very good point which explains a lot.

But as a general principal (not directed at anyone in particular), why do you need to have played rugby to a high level to decide if the laws of the game have been broken?
User avatar
kermischocolate
Enlightened
 
Posts: 918
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 2:56 am
Location: Glasgow

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby backrower8 » April 21st, 2017, 6:20 pm

kermischocolate wrote:
Timbit wrote:
Nigel Owens never played serious rugby, Garces never played serious rugby? Should we assume they wouldn't know a clear out if they saw one?


Very good point which explains a lot.

But as a general principal (not directed at anyone in particular), why do you need to have played rugby to a high level to decide if the laws of the game have been broken?


Because not all situations are black and white and people who are well sensitised to the environments they are adjudicating on will make most likely better decisons.

The referees may not have played but they are highly sensitised to the sport and in my opinion would make great disciplinary panelists when they finish refereeing. The central issue for me is having people on these panels who are very well versed in the sport so they can judge the grey areas. No doubt it is not easy to find people with the relevant experience willing to do such a thankless task.

But when we see professionals like Cian Healy busting a gut and then being busted for what all of us think was an inocuous looking incident and missing a Europen semi-final as a result it does make you wonder about the whole panel's qualifications and relevant experience. Frankly, two of them being women is indicative to me that AT LEAST two of the panel were probably not versed in clearing out rucks.

Cue the PC brigade.

Put it this way, if I was told those women were Fiona Coughlan and Fiona Steed I would have no problem whatsoever....then again come to think of it... I would probably have an issue with the likes of Rob Andrew or Jonathan Davies as they never cleared out a ruck either! :lol:
backrower8
Knowledgeable
 
Posts: 284
Joined: December 4th, 2006, 7:13 pm
Location: Blackrock

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby All Blacks nil » April 21st, 2017, 6:48 pm

The clip shown is inconclusive (does not show the collisionfor a start) and Healy could not have been convicted on that video angle alone.
There are various angles available to disciplinary panelsd at the vast majority of pro games with each camera focussing on the play. I would be pretty confident that at least one of those angles shows Healy committing the foul play as charged.
If no other angle were available I would appeal on his behalf. The Leinster management (all of whom are vastly experienced in pro rugby) have seen all the evidence and have not appealed. By their acceptance of the verdict they seem to concur with the non rugby playing but experienced disciplinary board.
Are they wrong?
Enough said.
All Blacks nil
Mullet
 
Posts: 1920
Joined: December 15th, 2013, 11:52 pm

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby Peg Leg » April 21st, 2017, 9:20 pm

backrower8 wrote:
kermischocolate wrote:
Timbit wrote:
Nigel Owens never played serious rugby, Garces never played serious rugby? Should we assume they wouldn't know a clear out if they saw one?


Very good point which explains a lot.

But as a general principal (not directed at anyone in particular), why do you need to have played rugby to a high level to decide if the laws of the game have been broken?


Because not all situations are black and white and people who are well sensitised to the environments they are adjudicating on will make most likely better decisons.

The referees may not have played but they are highly sensitised to the sport and in my opinion would make great disciplinary panelists when they finish refereeing. The central issue for me is having people on these panels who are very well versed in the sport so they can judge the grey areas. No doubt it is not easy to find people with the relevant experience willing to do such a thankless task.

But when we see professionals like Cian Healy busting a gut and then being busted for what all of us think was an inocuous looking incident and missing a Europen semi-final as a result it does make you wonder about the whole panel's qualifications and relevant experience. Frankly, two of them being women is indicative to me that AT LEAST two of the panel were probably not versed in clearing out rucks.

Cue the PC brigade.

Put it this way, if I was told those women were Fiona Coughlan and Fiona Steed I would have no problem whatsoever....then again come to think of it... I would probably have an issue with the likes of Rob Andrew or Jonathan Davies as they never cleared out a ruck either! :lol:

The grey area is the problem for me. There shouldn't be any
"It was Mrs O'Leary's cow"
Daniel Sullivan
User avatar
Peg Leg
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 7885
Joined: February 1st, 2010, 6:08 pm
Location: Procrastinasia

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby kermischocolate » April 21st, 2017, 11:35 pm

Peg Leg wrote:
backrower8 wrote:
kermischocolate wrote:
Very good point which explains a lot.

But as a general principal (not directed at anyone in particular), why do you need to have played rugby to a high level to decide if the laws of the game have been broken?


Because not all situations are black and white and people who are well sensitised to the environments they are adjudicating on will make most likely better decisons.

The referees may not have played but they are highly sensitised to the sport and in my opinion would make great disciplinary panelists when they finish refereeing. The central issue for me is having people on these panels who are very well versed in the sport so they can judge the grey areas. No doubt it is not easy to find people with the relevant experience willing to do such a thankless task.

But when we see professionals like Cian Healy busting a gut and then being busted for what all of us think was an inocuous looking incident and missing a Europen semi-final as a result it does make you wonder about the whole panel's qualifications and relevant experience. Frankly, two of them being women is indicative to me that AT LEAST two of the panel were probably not versed in clearing out rucks.

Cue the PC brigade.

Put it this way, if I was told those women were Fiona Coughlan and Fiona Steed I would have no problem whatsoever....then again come to think of it... I would probably have an issue with the likes of Rob Andrew or Jonathan Davies as they never cleared out a ruck either! :lol:

The grey area is the problem for me. There shouldn't be any


Exactly. Apply the laws of the game- a player that has been cited has either done what (s)he's been cited for or not.

This is half the problem with refereeing in the first place- picking and choosing which laws to focus on, which to let slide to "manage the spectacle" etc etc. The referees job is hard enough- just apply the laws of the game then there would be some consistency.

I do think there should be referees on the disciplinary panel but lets face it the citing and disciplinary process is a total shambles- especially within the Pro12. Has anyone ever seen the detail of any hearing- what conclusions they have come to and why?

In this case the fact Leinster haven't appealed it speaks volumes.
User avatar
kermischocolate
Enlightened
 
Posts: 918
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 2:56 am
Location: Glasgow

Cian Healy cited

Postby artaneboy » April 22nd, 2017, 8:36 am

kermischocolate wrote:
Peg Leg wrote:
backrower8 wrote:[quote="kermischocolate"]

Very good point which explains a lot.

But as a general principal (not directed at anyone in particular), why do you need to have played rugby to a high level to decide if the laws of the game have been broken?


Because not all situations are black and white and people who are well sensitised to the environments they are adjudicating on will make most likely better decisons.

The referees may not have played but they are highly sensitised to the sport and in my opinion would make great disciplinary panelists when they finish refereeing. The central issue for me is having people on these panels who are very well versed in the sport so they can judge the grey areas. No doubt it is not easy to find people with the relevant experience willing to do such a thankless task.

But when we see professionals like Cian Healy busting a gut and then being busted for what all of us think was an inocuous looking incident and missing a Europen semi-final as a result it does make you wonder about the whole panel's qualifications and relevant experience. Frankly, two of them being women is indicative to me that AT LEAST two of the panel were probably not versed in clearing out rucks.

Cue the PC brigade.

Put it this way, if I was told those women were Fiona Coughlan and Fiona Steed I would have no problem whatsoever....then again come to think of it... I would probably have an issue with the likes of Rob Andrew or Jonathan Davies as they never cleared out a ruck either! :lol:

The grey area is the problem for me. There shouldn't be any


Exactly. Apply the laws of the game- a player that has been cited has either done what (s)he's been cited for or not.

This is half the problem with refereeing in the first place- picking and choosing which laws to focus on, which to let slide to "manage the spectacle" etc etc. The referees job is hard enough- just apply the laws of the game then there would be some consistency.

I do think there should be referees on the disciplinary panel but lets face it the citing and disciplinary process is a total shambles- especially within the Pro12. Has anyone ever seen the detail of any hearing- what conclusions they have come to and why?

In this case the fact Leinster haven't appealed it speaks volumes.[/quote]

Well Kermis- it may speak volumes, but it's not at all clear what it's saying! Are we:
A- refusing to participate in contempt at the process and decision,
B- convinced Cian is innocent but deciding not to endure the distraction of an appeal, or
C- realise that the evidence- the much speculated "unseen video footage" , clearly condemned him and it's not worth the candle.

The problem with jumping to option C is that there is no indication of there actually being these mysterious footage- and all the angles us mere mortals get to see are not pointing to any breach of the laws. Posters assume they must exist- because.. why?
If they exist, why in the interests of transparency aren't they made available so we can all judge.

BTW- there are huge grey areas in the laws and in the interpretations. That's the curse and glory of human involvement in the pitch... and the hearing room apparently.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by artaneboy on April 22nd, 2017, 9:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Oh, I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused!"
User avatar
artaneboy
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: January 25th, 2011, 8:46 pm

Cian Healy cited

Postby artaneboy » April 22nd, 2017, 8:40 am

[quote="kermischocolate"][quote="Peg Leg"][quote="backrower8"][quote="kermischocolate"]



Double post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Oh, I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused!"
User avatar
artaneboy
Girvan Dempsey
 
Posts: 2449
Joined: January 25th, 2011, 8:46 pm

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby kermischocolate » April 22nd, 2017, 11:20 pm

artaneboy wrote:
Well Kermis- it may speak volumes, but it's not at all clear what it's saying! Are we:
A- refusing to participate in contempt at the process and decision,
B- convinced Cian is innocent but deciding not to endure the distraction of an appeal, or
C- realise that the evidence- the much speculated "unseen video footage" , clearly condemned him and it's not worth the candle.

The problem with jumping to option C is that there is no indication of there actually being these mysterious footage- and all the angles us mere mortals get to see are not pointing to any breach of the laws. Posters assume they must exist- because.. why?
If they exist, why in the interests of transparency aren't they made available so we can all judge.

BTW- there are huge grey areas in the laws and in the interpretations. That's the curse and glory of human involvement in the pitch... and the hearing room apparently.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


None of those.
I meant speaks volumes in that if they thought they could appeal and win they would. The assumption is that whatever evidence was presented was pretty damming. It was not a comment on whether I think he is guilty or should be banned or not. The fact they haven't (to me) says they don't have anything to counter whatever evidence has been presented against him. None of us will ever know exactly why he has been banned because the Pro12 never publish details. There is no transparency nor consistency in the citing or disciplinary process which is what infuriates fans of every club.
User avatar
kermischocolate
Enlightened
 
Posts: 918
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 2:56 am
Location: Glasgow

Re: Cian Healy cited

Postby Dave Cahill » April 22nd, 2017, 11:45 pm

I think what happened is that Leinster saw the video evidence and knew that it was extremely likely that on foot of it the player would be banned. That would mean he misses the semi-final. If he pleads guilty, he misses the semi final, if he pleads not guilty and gets banned he misses the semi-final. The only chance the player has of making the semi-final is if he pleads not guilty and Leinster win the case - its not much of a chance, but its the only chance he has - so thats what they did. There's no point in appealing because he still misses the semi-final.

I can't understand why TG4 only showed the one angle - there would have been about a dozen cameras at the game (and the citing process has access to the participating teams own footage as well).
I have Bumbleflex
User avatar
Dave Cahill
Gordon D'Arcy
 
Posts: 20274
Joined: January 24th, 2006, 4:32 pm
Location: None of your damn business

PreviousNext

Return to Leinster Addicts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Cathalsmart, wixfjord and 4 guests