BR wrote:To be fair Baggy - I believe your description outlined what a gentleman was not rather than what he is.
No BR, that is not remotely fair. I believe you may be thinking of a Christian Gentleman, an entirely different matter and one, quite probably prone to ironing.
BR wrote:To be fair Baggy - I believe your description outlined what a gentleman was not rather than what he is.
No BR, that is not remotely fair. I believe you may be thinking of a Christian Gentleman, an entirely different matter and one, quite probably prone to ironing.
I believe we are at cross-purposes. Your description listed things one doesn't do. Things that aren't the done-thing, in fact. Characteristics not found in a gentleman, and in that way you described a gentleman. I know plenty of gentlemen who are christians, but I agree they would not normally be described as Christian Gentlemen.
Dave wrote:I'd love to hear his explanation on it and why he tucked his arm in and then raised it up like that.
I can think of only one reason to bring up his arm - to clobber Patchell's head with it. Even if he had not used his arm at all, to charge into a player's head like that is dangerous play.
Spiffer I've watched it several times now, doubtless you are aware that I am a world acknowledged expert at viewing such occurrences and reaching insightful conclusions.
In this case the "hit" was entirely with a solid and straight arm, contact made more or less with the outside of the elbow, not the boney bit thankfully, his arm then between Patchell's head and the maul he brings it up to release it, however it looks a Zorro-like flourish. I believe the damage to poor Pachell was not done by the raising of the arm but the initial hit which was to the side of his head & neck.
Well you could be right Bags. But as far as I am concerned the uberanalysis of the mechanics of the hit is but hair splitting. My view is that the gross one flew into that ruck with the sole objective of targeting Patchell. Whether the end point was with straight arm, inside arm, outside arm, elbow, arrse etc. makes little difference to the action and outcome. I am well scunnered with the big lump's continued antics and want him gone from our fair shores. He is not worthy of the Ulster shirt.
For my part I don't consider Nick a dirty player somewhat reckless looking due to his size and shape .
He can put a lot of power into a three step movement into a ruck .
As I previously stated if the opposition step aside he goes over the top , if they fail to step aside the impact looks like a body check .
The only safe thing for Nick to do is fringe rucks to be a side tackle or scrum half guard .
Like Baggy I like the guy but injuries have seriously reduced his mobility and contribution to the team .
Men can Iron Gentlemen don't . Be refined and develop a little class and a few principals such as you don't kick a man when he's down --- unless he starts it .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Within this carapace of skepticism there lives an optimist
Kicking a man when he is down. There's a thing that I had never even envisaged until in my yute in the mid sixties I saw a man down being kicked. I couldn't conceive of what manner of lowlife could do such a thing but there was the evidence, local thug Jamesie Chambers, forever committed to memory as the lowest of the low.
Of course we use it as a metaphor without much thought but it's a vile act. As much as anyone can like a Kiwi, I like Fat Nick though admittedly to call him useful these days is a stretch.
NEVER MOVE ON. Years on, I cannot ever watch Ireland with anything but indifference, I continue to wish for the imminent death of Donal Spring, the FIRFUC's executioner of Wee Paddy & Wee Stu, and I hate the FIRFUCs with undiminished passion.
The lad Hughes from Wasps got "3 weeks" last night for his accidential knee to North's head on Fri night. Banned for next 4 weekends (until April 28). Its more like a 3 game ban, potentially 4 if Wasps beat Comic Book Guy's World XV on Sunday.
Surely a certainty that Williams will miss the rest of this season, given how much worse his offence was. Can part of a ban be carried over to another season, if say Williams got 12 weeks and it only needed a 8 week ban to end his current season? Anyone know when his hearing is?
shamalicious wrote:8 week ban for Nick, can play from 1st September.
Out for the season.......... Out of town ! ? !
Eight-week ban for Williams
Ulster number eight Nick Williams has been handed an eight-week suspension for striking Cardiff Blues full-back Rhys Patchell at Ravenhill.
The suspension was initially sixteen weeks but in the absence of any aggravating factors and in light of several mitigating factors, including the player's exemplary previous record, the Disciplinary Committee reduced the ban.
Taking into account the matches remaining this season, and two warm-up matches scheduled for the start of next season, Williams is free to resume playing from Monday, 1 September 2015 and has the right of appeal.
