Quinlan Hearing

Micky Dolenz

anonymous_joe wrote: »

In fairness, Sexton's gotten plenty of abuse for shouting at O'Gara and kicking Mafi, and various people on various boards have called for Munster players to cripple him next time they play. If a Leinster forward had gouged a Munster player I'm sure that a few Leinster fans would try and defend him against all evidence and Munster fans would call him a disgrace.

I hear you Joe,

I really dislike posters who make slurs against any player. It is childish and has no place here.

I felt the same about the Sexton abusers. They both had moments of madness but to character assassinate is out of order in my book.

Darlie

Its obviously disappointing that we've lost another Lion, especially one who'll never get the chance again.
However, he was deservedly punished for what he did. Whether it was deliberate or not has nothing to do with it, except that if deliberate its the act of a thug, if accidental its the act of a fool.
Imagine if it was Richie McCaw or Schalk Burger we were talking about, he'd be hung, drawn and quartered by all and sundry.
A legend for Munster, a legend at times for Ireland, so unfortunate that its ended like this but there is only one person to blame I'm afraid.

Micky Dolenz

Darlie wrote: »

A legend for Munster, a legend at times for Ireland, so unfortunate that its ended like this but there is only one person to blame I'm afraid.

yeah Cullen, why did he have to put his face in the way of Quinny's hand?

Diabhal Beag

Lets be frank, as mentoned previously Alan was a good and fair player who was punished fairly and I'm sure he will be disappointed but rules are rules.

At least he won't have to play for Connacht so he got off lucky

overmantle

Shouldn't have done what he did in the heat of the moment. Remember though, it is a big price as it's not just the 12 week ban, the slur on his heretofore good name but also being stripped of the Lions place, honour etc etc. Having said all that, the most important thing is that Cullen is ok.

overmantle

I agree with Little Shyte. Alan has been a good and fair player, which has been completely overlooked by some. Sadly when things start to go wrong, there are always too many people happy to jump on the bandwagon and join the lynch mob. I suppose it's the mob mentality at work.

Darlie

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

yeah Cullen, why did he have to put his face in the way of Quinny's hand?

He may have thought it was Cullens arse, can be hard to tell the difference sometimes:eek:

overmantle

I agree with that too!

thomond2006

Darlie wrote: »

He may have thought it was Cullens arse, can be hard to tell the difference sometimes:eek:

Little Shyte wrote: »

Lets be frank, as mentoned previously Alan was a good and fair player who was punished fairly and I'm sure he will be disappointed but rules are rules.

At least he won't have to play for Connacht so he got off lucky

+1 on both counts.

Cruel on Cullen though. :D:D

thehighground

anonymous_joe wrote: »

In fairness, Sexton's gotten plenty of abuse for shouting at O'Gara and kicking Mafi, and various people on various boards have called for Munster players to cripple him next time they play. If a Leinster forward had gouged a Munster player I'm sure that a few Leinster fans would try and defend him against all evidence and Munster fans would call him a disgrace.

No, you are talking rubbish now. Mafi got a boot into his face from Sexton who only got 2 weeks. Mafi also had to get treatment for his injury from Sexton's boot. Cullen didn't. (And of course Mafi got binned for reacting badly to a kick in the face).

I can't recall anyone here calling for Sexton to be mamed. I think he should have got a longer punishment though.

thebaz

I'm sure if he could roll back the clock, what drove him to do it, against a fellow Irish player , we'll never know - Munster were awfull on the day , and maybe the poor performance of Munster just got to him - tough player as he is , this cowardly act seamed out of character - but lets rout gouging out of the game - if someone gouged my eyes , I certainly wouldn't have been as mild mannered as Cullen - so well done Leo

danthefan

Sexton has absolutely no relevance to Quinlan's ban.

phog

danthefan wrote: »

Sexton has absolutely no relevance to Quinlan's ban.

In some fans eyes (pardon the pun) it might. What amazes me is the usual split between fans, when a Leinster player does something that deserves a citing the every Munster fan wants them banned for life, when a Munster player does something similar the Leinster guys want him gone.

Yet, in both the Quinny and Sexton citings the injured player or team didn't want to take it further which in a way is wrong. I've no problem with players supporting their own or giving character witness if needed in fact I think that is a good thing but I think the IRFU shouldn't be putting any pressure on teams not to cite or give evidence.

Tim Robbins

[Jackass] wrote: »

Got off lightly in my opinion. Through away his last chance at a Lions tour through stupidity which is disapointing as he's the quality of player who should be able to enjoy such an occasion, just not the quality of character.

Completly agree. If there weren't 20+ cameras at the match (only one of which picked it up), he would have got away with it.

Any attempt at gouging should be 12 months in my opinion. The game is dangerous enough as it is without eye gouging.

Chucky the tree

phog wrote: »

In some fans eyes (pardon the pun) it might. What amazes me is the usual split between fans, when a Leinster player does something that deserves a citing the every Munster fan wants them banned for life, when a Munster player does something similar the Leinster guys want him gone.

Yet, in both the Quinny and Sexton citings the injured player or team didn't want to take it further which in a way is wrong. I've no problem with players supporting their own or giving character witness if needed in fact I think that is a good thing but I think the IRFU shouldn't be putting any pressure on teams not to cite or give evidence.

They don't. That's why teams dont have a choice in citings. It's done independently. I'm pretty sure if Cullen didn't want to give evidence he wouldn't of.

juvenal

phog wrote: »

In some fans eyes (pardon the pun) it might. What amazes me is the usual split between fans, when a Leinster player does something that deserves a citing the every Munster fan wants them banned for life, when a Munster player does something similar the Leinster guys want him gone.

Yet, in both the Quinny and Sexton citings the injured player or team didn't want to take it further which in a way is wrong. I've no problem with players supporting their own or giving character witness if needed in fact I think that is a good thing but I think the IRFU shouldn't be putting any pressure on teams not to cite or give evidence.

I think the key issue here phog is consistency. For what it's worth I feel that Sexton got off very lightly, and should've been given more time on the sidelines. IMO Quinlan may or may not have intended to gouge Cullen in the heat of the moment, it's a moot point as only Alan Quinlan knows himself what his intent was. But it was undoubtedly reckless on his part at the very least.

While it's admirable that Cullen, Chieka and today O'Driscoll all expressed a reluctance to comment on the incident and offered support to Alan Quinlan, the interprovincial nature of the match, and the upcoming Lions tour are totally irrelevant when adjudicating on the incident. Yes, it is unfortunate that Alan Quinlan will probably miss a chance on a career highlight, but the timing cannot influence the judgement. Just because the game was between teams from the same country, doesn't suddenly invoke a new set of laws for the officials and players to follow. The laws are the same worldwide, and should be applied fairly and with balance around the world, irrespective of the local culture, profile of the game or teams involved.

For the sake of Rugby Union, there needs to be clear consensus and consistency across the board when dealing with acts of foul play. Some of the citing procedures in the Magners League are a joke, with the sense that unions are looking after their own when dealing with indiscipline. This cannot continue if rugby union is to take itself seriously as a professional sport. As you can see from any disciplinary hearing, the player is accompanied by at least an advisor and a legal professional, which indicates that under the laws of the sport, it's essentially a legal hearing. And when the law is involved, precedence and past judgements come into play.

We do not want to descend into a scenario where players are arguing their case on previous instances, as opposed to the actual facts of the specific case at hand. A clear protocol and united front from all governing bodies and unions is stamping out dangerous and illegal play is necessary to protect the integrity of the sport and continue the fantastic development the game has seen since the advent of the professional era.

Based on that, the committee were absolutely correct to give Quinlan a minimum 12-week ban considering the guilty verdict. While it's extremely unfortunate for Quinlan on a personal level considering his Lions selection, his nationality, the high-profile nature of the semi-final, the interpro rivalry between the two teams, and the pending tour cannot influence the outcome, in order to protect the integrity of the system.

Dangerous/reckless/illegal play (call it what you want) is just that - no matter what the circumstances.

thehighground

I agree in general with what juvenal has just posted, but I do find the inconsistency irritating.

Corry got 6 weeks with a similar type charge. Quinlan gets 12 weeks. Sexton gets 2 weeks for actually causing not alone injury to Mafi, but Mafi gets binned for reacting badly.

anonymous_joe

thehighground wrote: »

No, you are talking rubbish now. Mafi got a boot into his face from Sexton who only got 2 weeks. Mafi also had to get treatment for his injury from Sexton's boot. Cullen didn't. (And of course Mafi got binned for reacting badly to a kick in the face).

I can't recall anyone here calling for Sexton to be mamed. I think he should have got a longer punishment though.

Ah I've seen some very poisonous things posted about Sexton, especially on less heavily modded sites. Leinsterfans (has a few Munster fans wumming on it at all times) and Munsterfans hosted some pretty horrendous suggestions. As well as a huge volume of 'he'll get a right beating next time we play.'

Should Sexton have gotten a bigger punishment, possibly, but as regards Quinlan, he's been found guilty, so he has to take the punishment.

thehighground wrote: »

I agree in general with what juvenal has just posted, but I do find the inconsistency irritating.

Corry got 6 weeks with a similar type charge. Quinlan gets 12 weeks. Sexton gets 2 weeks for actually causing not alone injury to Mafi, but Mafi gets binned for reacting badly.

Magners League citation system's a joke. Jennings earlier in the season iirc for example.

thehighground

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Ah I've seen some very poisonous things posted about Sexton, especially on less heavily modded sites. Leinsterfans (has a few Munster fans wumming on it at all times) and Munsterfans hosted some pretty horrendous suggestions. As well as a huge volume of 'he'll get a right beating next time we play.'

The worst I've seen is referring to Sexton as being a nasty piece of works.

Should Sexton have gotten a bigger punishment, possibly, but as regards Quinlan, he's been found guilty, so he has to take the punishment.

As I've said, it would be a help if the bans were consistent across the board.

Magners League citation system's a joke. Jennings earlier in the season iirc for example.

But Corry was sited by ERC - and no one even mentions now that he was cited. Quinlan is compared to Neil Best (Guinness Premiership / RFU).

anonymous_joe

thehighground wrote: »

The worst I've seen is referring to Sexton as being a nasty piece of works.

I've seen worse sadly.

As I've said, it would be a help if the bans were consistent across the board.

We can but hope.

But Corry was sited by ERC - and no one even mentions now that he was cited. Quinlan is compared to Neil Best (Guinness Premiership / RFU).

Yeah, sorry, I know that about Corry. Generosity for an England player?

Whereas Neil Best's not an international (nor an English player) at a club who aren't challenging for a win, ergo, you can throw the book.

NotWormBoy

thehighground wrote: »

The worst I've seen is referring to Sexton as being a nasty piece of works.

There has been a lot worse posted about Sexton on, for example, munsterfans boards. I don't read the Leinsterfans board, since I don't think I'd get a massive amount of unbiased debate on it, but I spent about an hour earlier in the week on Munsterfans.ie while I was in work reading through a few recent threads (not that I expected a lack of bias there either). And some of the stuff was pretty vitriolic. 'If he starts, he won't finish" kinda thing. Unpleasant.

Now before anyone quotes anything from Leinsterfans.ie, I'm sure the same goes on there about various Munster players. And its equally reprehensible. For the record, I didn't realise it at the time, but after watching Sexton's kick at Mafi, I thought he should have gotten more, but unfortunately he didn't.

The fact that Sexton got less than he should have is irrelevant to any other case. The inconsistency is annoying though, I agree. But you can't make your choices of sentencing/punishment from a minimal "well-someone-last-time-got-less-time-so-we-have-to-do-it-like-that" point of view. Otherwise you'll have everyone getting f*ck all punishment for their offences, however intentional they were or not.

Quinlan can't complain his sanction, even if we all wish he would be able to play for the Lions. And I think most Irish rugby supporters do, regardless of their colour.

Profiler

thehighground wrote: »

So, what are they doing then if its so straight forward and simple And whats / whose agenda is it?

Once more you "miss" the point. :rolleyes:

I saw the evidence, the ERC authorities saw the video evidence, most Rugby fans (those who could be objective) saw the evidence and came to the same conclusion - which was Quinlan had a case to answer to.

You saw claimed that you saw

1) Cullen was throwing Punches
2) Cullen was elbowing O'Connell
3) Cullen is no angel
4) D'Arcy once spear tackled a player
5) The ERC is a Lenister fan firing squad.

The ERC "agenda" well they want to protect players, preserve the integrity of the game. What parent would want their son or daughter to play the game when players can target the eyes of other players and not be punished?

The questionable agenda here is yours thehighground - what is your agenda thehighground? When you dodged the truth and made up lies about Cullen - what were you trying to do?

danthefan

Profiler wrote: »

Once more you "miss" the point. :rolleyes:

I saw the evidence, the ERC authorities saw the video evidence, most Rugby fans (those who could be objective) saw the evidence and came to the same conclusion - which was Quinlan had a case to answer to.

You saw claimed that you saw

1) Cullen was throwing Punches
2) Cullen was elbowing O'Connell
3) Cullen is no angel
4) D'Arcy once spear tackled a player
5) The ERC is a Lenister fan firing squad.

The ERC "agenda" well they want to protect players, preserve the integrity of the game. What parent would want their son or daughter to play the game when players can target the eyes of other players and not be punished?

The questionable agenda here is yours thehighground - what is your agenda thehighground? When you dodged the truth and made up lies about Cullen - what were you trying to do?

Don't forget:

6) The validity of video evidence is for some reason directly proportional to its length, rather than what it actually shows.

dreamer_ire

Munster fan here and while I respect what Quinlan brings I don't like his style of play... never have. While I agree the ban is justified, and he was lucky with the length of it, I do feel sorry for him as an individual that he threw away the chance to be a Lion. A moment of madness that will cost him dear. If nothing else I hope it shows others who may be tempted that gouging has no place in the game.

need assistance

Love the sinner, hate the sin, as the old priest used to say to me.

However the "sin" in this case is worthy of a long ban. Munster fans on this site have let themselves down and Munster down by attempting to drag Sexton's boot, Sky's perceived agenda etc. into it.

Be honest, those shouting loudest against the ban, which would you rather have inflicted on you, a petulant kick in the face or an experienced forward with a known knowledge of the dirty side of the game, gouge you?

thehighground

Profiler wrote: »

Once more you "miss" the point. :rolleyes:

I saw the evidence, the ERC authorities saw the video evidence, most Rugby fans (those who could be objective) saw the evidence and came to the same conclusion - which was Quinlan had a case to answer to.

You saw claimed that you saw

1) Cullen was throwing Punches
2) Cullen was elbowing O'Connell
3) Cullen is no angel
4) D'Arcy once spear tackled a player
5) The ERC is a Lenister fan firing squad.

The ERC "agenda" well they want to protect players, preserve the integrity of the game. What parent would want their son or daughter to play the game when players can target the eyes of other players and not be punished?

The questionable agenda here is yours thehighground - what is your agenda thehighground? When you dodged the truth and made up lies about Cullen - what were you trying to do?

Didn't realise that now you have got your pint of Quinlan's blood, I have to give one now. :eek: It must be killing you that he only got 12 weeks and not what you would have wanted - a life ban from all rugby.

Now, what sentence would you like for me - would a 12 weeks ban be enough - or would you be in for the kill and get me binned for a year?

By the way, the only agenda I have is that there was an awful lot of santimonious waffle being spouted. All I ever claimed was that I would like Quinlan to get a fair hearing and that I would not be part of any hanging party because I couldn't see what was going on in a 3 inch YouTube video which was removed.

Let me remind you again - Quinlan got the very lowest end of the scale;

So my 'agenda' has been satisfied which was 'due process - innocent until proven guilty'.

By the way, did you listen to the Brian O'Driscoll interview and what he said about Quinlan? Oh, and according to him, I don't think any kids are going to be safe, because I'm pretty sure they will know that there won't be any cameras around to catch any foul play.

thehighground

need assistance wrote: »

Love the sinner, hate the sin, as the old priest used to say to me.

However the "sin" in this case is worthy of a long ban. Munster fans on this site have let themselves down and Munster down by attempting to drag Sexton's boot, Sky's perceived agenda etc. into it.

Be honest, those shouting loudest against the ban, which would you rather have inflicted on you, a petulant kick in the face or an experienced forward with a known knowledge of the dirty side of the game, gouge you?

To be honest, I'd prefer neither - but comparing Mafi and Cullen's faces, I think Mafi came out worse than Cullen.

btw, you started off well with the love the sinner, hate the sin. Then you ruined the sentiment and went into judgemental mode ...

anonymous_joe

thehighground wrote: »

To be honest, I'd prefer neither - but comparing Mafi and Cullen's faces, I think Mafi came out worse than Cullen.

btw, you started off well with the love the sinner, hate the sin. Then you ruined the sentiment and went into judgemental mode ...

I made a big post a while ago, allow me recap it's basic point:

He's been found guilty. Innocent until proven guilty is satisfied. We still don't know if it was deliberate, but it was a horrendous thing to do. As an individual act it merited that ban. And it doesn't matter what player(s) were involved.

Alan Quinlan received the standard punishment for the offence he committed. The end.

juvenal

thehighground wrote: »

To be honest, I'd prefer neither - but comparing Mafi and Cullen's faces, I think Mafi came out worse than Cullen.

btw, you started off well with the love the sinner, hate the sin. Then you ruined the sentiment and went into judgemental mode ...

Highground, the injuries sustained from the foul play are largely irrelevant. Intent is king, what actually happens as a result of the illegal actions is purely secondary. In my book attempted murder is as bad as murder, the only difference being that you failed with your intentions. For example, the ridiculous over-reaction to that spear tackle in the 2005 New Zealand-Lions test was sensationalised because of the player involved, the injury sustained, and the high-profile nature of the match. All of this created a smokescreen which actually took away from the actual incident, the bones of which were that it was a highly-dangerous spear tackle, and the players involved should've been the subject of an immediate disciplinary process and lengthy bans. The fact that the victim was the Lions captain, or that he has a season-ending injury, or that it happened in the opening minutes of the highest-profile match of the year are irrelevant - but these arguments were what the media and the fans used to fuel their outrage after the incident.

Do we need to actually have some player lose the sight in his or her eye and for their career to end before we sit up and take notice?:mad: As I've mentioned, IMO Sexton deserved more, but this thread is about Alan Quinlan's reckless play in the HEC semi-final.

I've followed all the posts on this topic in several threads, and tbh I find that while most of your points are well made and articulate, there's a certain sense that somehow Alan Quinlan is a victim in all of this, or perhaps that he's not fully responsible for what happened. He is fully culpable, and his team, place of birth or background doesn't come into it. As I've said several times, only Alan Quinlan himself knows if he intended to gouge Cullen, but only the most blinkered of viewers would try and argue he's not at least guilty of recklessness. It's the player's responsibility to ensure that their fingers do not come into contact with an opponent's eyes, not anyone else's.

It's a discussion board, and people are going to voice their opinions. I may be wrong, but the impression from your posts is that because he's a Munster player, and you're a Munster supporter, you hold him up to a slightly different set of standards than players from other teams and provinces. Ask yourself this, would you honestly make the same arguments, and display the same patience with the judgement process if this was a player not from Munster? This may not be true, but the constant siege mentality, lame excuses referencing youtube video quality, and calls for "due process" b/s just makes your argument sounds shallow and biased.

Trying to appear to defend Quinlan's action are, IMO, as bad as the posters who resorted to foul language and insults to get their point across. The extremist point of view, on both sides, is pathetic and no sport needs that sort of partial and biased attitude when it comes to defending the integrity and laws of the game. If this is not your position, then my apologies, but this is how the tone and attitude in some of your posts come across to me.

Looking at this video, and failing to acknowledge that Quinlan is at the very least guilty or recklessness, you must be suffering from a severe case of cranial-rectal inversion. Using arguments like video quality or the screen size isn't even being pedantic - it's just a downright reluctance or inability to apply impartial judgement on what you see.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BQK0OVJsS8

Available in HQ on youtube site.

Serenity Now!

thehighground wrote: »

To be honest, I'd prefer neither - but comparing Mafi and Cullen's faces, I think Mafi came out worse than Cullen

Moral relativism is not a basis for judging in a disciplinary procedure.

"Made Contact" with eye area. Guilty. Banned. Simple.

puntosporting

[Jackass] wrote: »

Misses the first 2 months of next season so? As this doens't run during the off season? Will Lions tour count as off season?

Got off lightly in my opinion. Through away his last chance at a Lions tour through stupidity which is disapointing as he's the quality of player who should be able to enjoy such an occasion, just not the quality of character.

He's disgraced himself and his team anyway. I don't think people should pussy foot around it because he plays for your province or your country, he did it to a fellow country man in a game where there should be an un-written rule of ultimate respect and his actions were the lowest of the low, pure coward material and I personaly would be ashamed to see him represent me in a Irish or Lions jersey.

It was an individual act and in no way associated to the team as you put it!
Munster team have no reason to feel in any way disgraced by one players action in the heat of the moment!