Tom Youngs

[Heathen]

Up before the beak tomorrow night.

[Neils]

Does us no good though.

[Old Geezer]

There should have been a penalty to us for the punch aside from any other sanction for it. From that phase of play Tigers went on to score.  Take that and the conclusion that the tackle on Kirige was not high and things could have been a whole lot different.

The "high tackle" would have been a 50:50 call but the fourth official should have seen the punch as the commentators did. Ref was blind sided so no criticism for him IMHO.

[Raggs]

It was a stone cold red always. Big shame it was missed, as it would have changed the game entirely. Some are missed, some are caught.

[Vespula Vulgaris]

There should have been a penalty to us for the punch aside from any other sanction for it. From that phase of play Tigers went on to score.  Take that and the conclusion that the tackle on Kirige was not high and things could have been a whole lot different.

The "high tackle" would have been a 50:50 call but the fourth official should have seen the punch as the commentators did. Ref was blind sided so no criticism for him IMHO.

Whatever people's personal thoughts, one arm of that tackle was above the shoulder and so according to the laws it was high.  Should have been a enalty, but then would have had to be a penalty try which was more than it deserved.  If the law is wrong, then we need to change it, not just ignore it sometimes and apply it at others.

[WaspsUpNorth]

Those two incidents totally changed the outcome of the game, the tone of discussion on this forum and potentially may effect individuals futures (e.g. Blackett).  In a professional sport, where individuals livelihoods are on the line, errors such as these of reviewable incidents should not occur.  I trust the authorities review the performance of TMO's!

[Shugs]

I find citings intensely frustrating and for me there is a simple way to remedy them. In this instance if Youngs gets banned it has no benefit for us and in fact benefits one of our competitors. The solution is simple. Youngs should be banned from the next game v Wasps. There's nothing that can be done about the effect on the game on the day but at least we'd see some benefit this way from an offence committed against us.

[welsh wasp]

For an awful moment and I thought this referred to our Thomas Young. 

[wasps]

I find citings intensely frustrating and for me there is a simple way to remedy them. In this instance if Youngs gets banned it has no benefit for us and in fact benefits one of our competitors. The solution is simple. Youngs should be banned from the next game v Wasps. There's nothing that can be done about the effect on the game on the day but at least we'd see some benefit this way from an offence committed against us.

Just playing devils advocate.
How do you handle it if Tom Youngs moved clubs before playing against us again?

[Lwasp]

I find citings intensely frustrating and for me there is a simple way to remedy them. In this instance if Youngs gets banned it has no benefit for us and in fact benefits one of our competitors. The solution is simple. Youngs should be banned from the next game v Wasps. There's nothing that can be done about the effect on the game on the day but at least we'd see some benefit this way from an offence committed against us.

Just playing devils advocate.
How do you handle it if Tom Youngs moved clubs before playing against us again?

And Tigers starting the next game against Wasps with a full complement of 23 players, just not allowed to pick Youngs, is hardly making up for them keeping Youngs on the pitch this weekend. I don't think there is any way to reward the team that was transgressed against by a cited player after the fact.

[Vespula Vulgaris]

There isn't a way.  But perhaps it could be made compulsory for a ref to check any accusation of deliberate violence against another player.

However to stop people using it to break momentum, if no evidence at all was found then the accusor gets the equivalent punishment.

So if that had been checked, Youngs would have been carded there and then.  But if Rowlands had accused him of it and the ref had checked and no punch was visible at all then Rowlands would have been carded instead.

[Shugs]

wasps - nothing you can do about that. Lwasps - agreed, but it's better than nothing.

[FishingWasp]

Some time ago, on the other site, (partly) playing devils advocate, I suggested similar to above, that the next time the two teams met, the transgressing team should be forced to play a player down for an appropriate period. A further thought is that the transgressed team should be able to choose which player is removed from the field?

Maybe a solution would be to have a review system (similar to cricket), so that each team can ask for a certain number of incidents (1 or 2 per game) to be reviewed, which if unsuccessful reduces the number of reviews left. - not to absolve the ref and TMO from any responsibility at any point during the game of course.

Whilst it seems right that a transgressing team suffer for x games after, what is inequitable is that the the team that were wronged potentially suffer further dependant on the subsequent results, and other teams gain from playing a potentially weakened team.

[MarleyWasp]

4 week ban.

[Vespula Vulgaris]

4 week ban.

Got a link? Need to send it to my tigers friend who said it was nothing and I was over reacting.