Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 2:48 pm  

Everything up to and including the first punch can be categorized as Biff. The second punch can't. Don't see why this is so hard for some people to understand.

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:18 pm  

RLBandit wrote:

What's the right punishment in your view?

I don't know. I think he will get about 12. I'm generally opposed to long band but what he did was appalling and I would struggle to argue against any length of ban really. However long.

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:26 pm  

craigizzard wrote:

Everything up to and including the first punch can be categorized as Biff. The second punch can't. Don't see why this is so hard for some people to understand.

Correct

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:11 pm  

Daily Mirror online has a readers poll on what the appropriate ban should be. Life-ban gets a whopping 44% with one year second most preferred by respondents.

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:13 pm  

Dally wrote:

Daily Mirror online has a readers poll on what the appropriate ban should be. Life-ban gets a whopping 44% with one year second most preferred by respondents.

Well we will find out soon enough.

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:19 pm  

Another "journalist" who perhaps has been looking at this thread?? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... fford.html

Another "journalist" who perhaps has been looking at this thread?? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... fford.html

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:21 pm  

thelinesman wrote:

Well we will find out soon enough.

Indeed. Not looking forward to it - too lenient and there will be uproar. Life-ban or similar and it would smack of panic. To get it right will be difficult.

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:25 pm  

Dally wrote: Another "journalist" who perhaps has been looking at this thread?? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... fford.html Well, he got the last bit right at least: "It was individual malice, but not the true face of rugby"

Dally wrote: Another "journalist" who perhaps has been looking at this thread?? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... fford.html Well, he got the last bit right at least: "It was individual malice, but not the true face of rugby"

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:30 pm  

Dally wrote:

Indeed. Not looking forward to it - too lenient and there will be uproar. Life-ban or similar and it would smack of panic. To get it right will be difficult.

It isn't at all. Go with 12/14/16/18 that kind of ban. It's not career ending but it's severe enough for the media to acknowledge the unprecedented nature of the ban in SL's history and for the players to realise it went beyond acceptable limits.

No one can reasonably argue that a double figure ban is harsh. It's not. He'll be lucky if he avoids criminal charges and if he does, it'll only be because of the sport being seen to have acted and Saints/Hohaia not wanting to take it further, which again will probably depend on what the RFL come up with.

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:31 pm  

flatcap wrote:

Well, he got the last bit right at least:

"It was individual malice, but not the true face of rugby"

What he didn't get right was saying that Flower walked over to finish the job. He did not contemplate for a few seconds and then "walk" over as implied / stated.