News:

  3. André Esterhuizen
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: André Esterhuizen  (Read 6004 times)

0 Members and 99 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #30 on: »
Quote from: JammyGit on Monday 26-Apr-2021, 11:33*
No, because it's not an attempt to make a legal action (i.e. a tackle) and is a deliberate act of violence. That's not to say the citing commission won't look at the relative lack of force as a potential mitigating factor when determining the ban.

Again I go back to the Botta decision for this comparison: A high tackle that doesn't connect isn't even a penalty. An attempted punch that doesn't connect is a yellow card.

Not sure that's the case - a no arms tackle isn't an attempt to make a legal action but the 'level of danger' mitigation would be applied.
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #31 on: »
shame, this wasn't much really, not an elbow but forearm, not a smash but a shove. Contact to the face twice in a season expecting a longer ban but hooping they look at it properly and realise there really wasn't a lot in it. The tussle that started it all was worse.
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #32 on: »
Quote from: Fursty on Monday 26-Apr-2021, 14:26*
Not sure that's the case - a no arms tackle isn't an attempt to make a legal action but the 'level of danger' mitigation would be applied.

A no arms tackle is an attempt to do something legal (tackle) but with illegal technique.
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #33 on: »
That very much depends on the no arms tackle - but I take your point and it would be impossible to prove intent.
Logged
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #34 on: »
If you get yellow for throwing a punch how come Cowan didn’t get one for the one on Brown which Joe prevented from connecting by pulling the stroppy 7 away. I thought that was what they were looking at at the time. Andre was trying to shove their player away. I didn’t think there was anything much in it considering all the other stuff that was going on.
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #35 on: »
Quote from: Mayor West on Monday 26-Apr-2021, 19:52*
If you get yellow for throwing a punch how come Cowan didn’t get one for the one on Brown which Joe prevented from connecting by pulling the stroppy 7 away. I thought that was what they were looking at at the time. Andre was trying to shove their player away. I didn’t think there was anything much in it considering all the other stuff that was going on.

Probably because like me, they didn't see a punch thrown at Brown! Not saying it didn't happened, but I didn't see it.

If Andre was trying to shove him away he probably wouldn't have held onto his shirt. Or hit him in the face with his forearm instead of pushing him.
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #36 on: »
Just watched the video replay twice, doesn't the Irish player palm off with fingers in the eye area, no way I'm saying the g word here, but the offences are contact to the head and touching the eye area! It was all handbags in my opinion, no malice from either and a red/yellow/talking to/ban can all be argued for both players. Plead guilty and use video in mitigation to show a bit of handbaggy shirt pulling. 'Yes, I know the law, no intent, no force, his action forced my upwards movement' I think its important to mitigate rather than to contest.
Logged
Agree Agree x 1 View List
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #37 on: »
Quote from: Bayernquin on Monday 26-Apr-2021, 20:59*
Just watched the video replay twice, doesn't the Irish player palm off with fingers in the eye area, no way I'm saying the g word here, but the offences are contact to the head and touching the eye area! It was all handbags in my opinion, no malice from either and a red/yellow/talking to/ban can all be argued for both players. Plead guilty and use video in mitigation to show a bit of handbaggy shirt pulling. 'Yes, I know the law, no intent, no force, his action forced my upwards movement' I think its important to mitigate rather than to contest.

From what I can see, citing committees tend to assume guilt and get annoyed when people contest a charge. Pleading guilty generally seems to be the most sensible thing to do in all cases. In this case, it was largely handbags but it is a red under current interpretations / guidance, so would be very silly to contest it. My all means plead mitigation, remorse that unnecessary handbags went to far, etc
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #38 on: »
Anyone know when the hearing is?
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #39 on: »
Quote from: QuincyJones on Tuesday 27-Apr-2021, 08:48*
Anyone know when the hearing is?

I believe they are usually on Wednesdays
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #40 on: »
According to Chris Jones on Twitter the hearing is tonight.
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #41 on: »
He's been charged with striking with the elbow, contrary to World Rugby Law 9.12. Low-end is 2 weeks, but it was to the head, so mid-range is 6 weeks. He won't get the 50% mitigation as it's his 2nd red, but he might get one week off for pleading guilty. He's could try to claim it wasn't red - very unlikely he'd get off, but only risk is the one week for pleading guilty.

Sensible action is probably to plead guilty, which SHOULD mean a 5 week ban and he's back for a play-off semi-final if we make it.
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #42 on: »
It's a strange sort of justice where you have to decide if it's in your interest to plead guilty to an offence when you yourself are convinced you are innocent.
Logged
Like Like x 1 Agree Agree x 1 View List
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #43 on: »
Quote from: DOK on Tuesday 27-Apr-2021, 15:24*
It's a strange sort of justice where you have to decide if it's in your interest to plead guilty to an offence when you yourself are convinced you are innocent.
As a player who's been sent off once this season for elbowing, I think he'd be mad to claim he was innocent.
Logged
Re: André Esterhuizen
« Reply #44 on: »
Is he guilty of making contact with another player's head with his forearm? Unquestionably. The whole thing is on video. He would be stupid to argue it didn't happen, or to deny that it shouldn't have happened, or to fail to show remorse.

Should he put forward some mitigation? Yes. It was largely without force and did not represent a high degree of danger. It was part of an ongoing altercation with a player who was behaving aggressively. It was (arguably) predominantly defensive - it looked to me as if he was putting his arm up to maintain some distance between them and misjudged the height difference more than anything else.

Will the panel consider that he's got form for being careless with his elbows? Yes.

What will it add up to? Who knows.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Up
« previous next »
  3. André Esterhuizen