Glasgow v Tigers

[FKAS]

My first reaction to a 'choke hold' (which I'm not sure it was TBH) would be to go for the arms.

Or try and stand up and wave your arms about to make it blindingly obvious to the referee.

[Danno]

Aye sorry, I wasn't being clear enough. For me it's (b). No room for leniency on certain offences regardless of intent.

So the ban for intentionally doing it should be far more (no problem with that) or just the same?

I don’t understand this thinking of making manslaughter the same as murder. Or just disregarding intent entirely because he’s a typical dirty Saffa.

Intent should stack on more, not mitigate if it's absent imo

[p/d]

So… definitely intentionally going for the eyes then.

It makes sense that some things are beyond the pale. If you take the risk of an open hand at a face then you meet the thin skull principle. Personally I don’t think reductions for gouging, punching etc are warranted

Yes. Intentionally going for another players eyes is beyond the pale. I’m just confused by the absolute certainty that this is what he was doing. My instinct when someone has me in a headlock would be to grab their face and shove them off me.

Clearly I’m too biased in Glasgow’s favour, not that I particularly like Venter as a player.

With you on this one MB

[switchskier]

Didn't see the game and only just saw the clip. Would have had no issue if it had been a full 12 game ban for Venter regardless.

My question is, why isn't Cole also being cited for putting him in a headlock?

[FKAS]

Didn't see the game and only just saw the clip. Would have had no issue if it had been a full 12 game ban for Venter regardless.

My question is, why isn't Cole also being cited for putting him in a headlock?

It's not really a headlock. Yes his arm is around the back of his head but he's not being choked. He's just holding him in to the ruck it's a penalty only offence. Needs to a red card to be cited.

[Mikey Brown]

That’s some curious logic/semantics.

[FKAS]

That’s some curious logic/semantics.

Not really, Cole is playing silly buggers. Wind up merchant antics, Venter sacks him in the maul and Cole holds him on the ground. Venter decides to go for Cole's eyes. He could have quite easily tried to stand up and then when pulled back down waved his arms to alert the ref and possibly save his side from conceding a try. He went with thuggery instead.

[Mikey Brown]

The goalposts keep moving so much in this conversation it’s kind of futile.

[switchskier]

That’s some curious logic/semantics.

Not really, Cole is playing silly buggers. Wind up merchant antics, Venter sacks him in the maul and Cole holds him on the ground. Venter decides to go for Cole's eyes. He could have quite easily tried to stand up and then when pulled back down waved his arms to alert the ref and possibly save his side from conceding a try. He went with thuggery instead.

So you're saying that Cole intentionally wrapped his arm around another players neck but it's ok because he didn't squeeze very hard?

[FKAS]

That’s some curious logic/semantics.

Not really, Cole is playing silly buggers. Wind up merchant antics, Venter sacks him in the maul and Cole holds him on the ground. Venter decides to go for Cole's eyes. He could have quite easily tried to stand up and then when pulled back down waved his arms to alert the ref and possibly save his side from conceding a try. He went with thuggery instead.

So you're saying that Cole intentionally wrapped his arm around another players neck but it's ok because he didn't squeeze very hard?

No I'm saying he wrapped it around the back of the guys head and effectively gave him a cuddle to stop him interfering with the scrum half playing the ball. Holding players in isn't exactly new is it. Standard penalty offence if the ref catches you.

[Donny osmond]

Not really, Cole is playing silly buggers. Wind up merchant antics, Venter sacks him in the maul and Cole holds him on the ground. Venter decides to go for Cole's eyes. He could have quite easily tried to stand up and then when pulled back down waved his arms to alert the ref and possibly save his side from conceding a try. He went with thuggery instead.

So you're saying that Cole intentionally wrapped his arm around another players neck but it's ok because he didn't squeeze very hard?

No I'm saying he wrapped it around the back of the guys head and effectively gave him a cuddle to stop him interfering with the scrum half playing the ball. Holding players in isn't exactly new is it. Standard penalty offence if the ref catches you.

Deliberate penalty action when opposition are in a try scoring situation... so you think it's a card and a penalty try then?

[oldbackrow]

So you're saying that Cole intentionally wrapped his arm around another players neck but it's ok because he didn't squeeze very hard?

No I'm saying he wrapped it around the back of the guys head and effectively gave him a cuddle to stop him interfering with the scrum half playing the ball. Holding players in isn't exactly new is it. Standard penalty offence if the ref catches you.

Deliberate penalty action when opposition are in a try scoring situation... so you think it's a card and a penalty try then?

As Leicester are on Glasgows line, why would it be a penalty try to Glasgow? When a maul gets sacked/collapsed as that was, keeping hold of the opponent you have hold of happens all the time. How anyone sees what Cole does as a 'chokehold' is totally beyond me!

[Donny osmond]

fair point, sorry got my wires crossed.

Edit: still a chokehold tho

[oldbackrow]

fair point, sorry got my wires crossed.

Edit: still a chokehold tho

I'm not a Leicester or Dan Cole fan, but very difficult to choke someone who you are face to face with, with one arm around the back of the neck, the other arm under your body!

[Puja]

Didn't see the game and only just saw the clip. Would have had no issue if it had been a full 12 game ban for Venter regardless.

My question is, why isn't Cole also being cited for putting him in a headlock?

You think Cole's actions are red-card-worthy?

Puja

[switchskier]

Didn't see the game and only just saw the clip. Would have had no issue if it had been a full 12 game ban for Venter regardless.

My question is, why isn't Cole also being cited for putting him in a headlock?

You think Cole's actions are red-card-worthy?

Puja

Either we're serious about no head and neck contact or we're not. It's not the same as a big tackle in open space but there's still a lot of moving forces in that situation and therefore there's risk. What the laws say I have no idea but I imagine it can be argued either way.

[Mellsblue]

Peak RR, gents. Thank you.

[oldbackrow]

Didn't see the game and only just saw the clip. Would have had no issue if it had been a full 12 game ban for Venter regardless.

My question is, why isn't Cole also being cited for putting him in a headlock?

You think Cole's actions are red-card-worthy?

Puja

Not in the slightest and doubt that, even if the ref saw it as a penalty offence (and I can't find which law it would be against) very much doubt it would even be a yellow.