Cockerill Charged over Premiershiop final

[Toby Warren]

I am a Tigers fan as well. I'm pleased at the length of ban - Cockers went OTT.

To pick up Kieran's point I can see why at the time he was angry - players going off injured as a result of foul play with no consequence to he offender. (With hind there was no foul play).

I understand why he was upset - still pleased that he's been banned. The Leicester forums are chuntering. My fav was 'Ben Foden swore when be saw the TMO had disallowed his try - that's swearing at an official ban him!'

 

[Red Cap Ref]

This is good news at all levels. I hope that they continue this and make it clear that players and coaches will not be allowed to try and intimidate refs, there is too much questioning of decisions in televised matches.
I have been watching some NRL league matches and it seems that they are starting to follow the UK soccer model of trying to be too close to the players and hope this will stop union going the same way.

 

[Browner]

The Leicester forums are chuntering. '

Hopefully Babelfish can translate disgruntled Beanbelly into English ? :biggrin:

 

[stuart3826]

Just read this article

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/L...kers-hearing/story-19443381-detail/story.html

I couldn't believe what I was reading!

e.g.

is this right?

This astounded me!

!!!!!!!!!!!???????

I am astounded that a 'journalist' could write this and that an editor would go to print. Or is it me?

According to the last set of Premiership regs that I read (and enforced), coaches are not allowed in the tech zone. The majority of DoR's remain in the stands. Richard Hill used to start the game in the tech zone and once there was able to stay. If you start in the stands, stay there. So , no, he wasn't allowed to approach the 4th official because he wasn't allowed in the tech zone.

In any case, use of foul language is not allowed towards a match official, and if it were at his level, God help the rest of us in the weeds!

 

[Ian_Cook]

I have no problem with this ban, as long as it's applied consistently in the future now a precedent has been set. I'm sure there are some in the RFU who would just want to see Cockers burned! He wasn't the only one at it last season though.

Its not a precedent thought, surely?

Wasn't Brendan Venter (Saracens?) banned for his outbursts, or was it because he ate all the biscuits at the hearing.

 

[Jacko]

The Leicester forums are chuntering.

Not just the forums it would appear!
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...ndling-of-richard-cockerill-case-8685509.html

 

[Phil E]

Not just the forums it would appear!
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...ndling-of-richard-cockerill-case-8685509.html

Cockerill left his seat in the stands to remonstrate with the fourth official after a tackle from Courtney Lawes on Leicester fly-half Toby Flood

Game over.

 

[Jacko]

Game over.

How so??

 

[Phil E]

How so??

Well last time I looked remonstrating with officials wasn't allowed.
Neither is entering the playing enclosure without the referees remission.

 

[Jacko]

Well last time I looked remonstrating with officials wasn't allowed.
Neither is entering the playing enclosure without the referees remission.

I don't know the exact regs for Premiership, especially for a game at Twickenham (ie what is described as playing enclosure etc) but if you read the full verdict you'll see that he went down twice to "have a word". Noone appears to be batting an eyelid about the first visit.

 

[Phil E]

I don't know the exact regs for Premiership, especially for a game at Twickenham (ie what is described as playing enclosure etc) but if you read the full verdict you'll see that he went down twice to "have a word". Noone appears to be batting an eyelid about the first visit.

That doesn't mean it's right?
It's not a regulation, it's in the laws of the game.

 

[Dixie]

No-one appears to be batting an eyelid about the first visit.

Maybe because Cockers removed said eyelid during it? :wink:

 

[damo]

I wonder if this one will be appealed:

http://www.rfu.com/thegame/discipline/judgements/judgments-2012-2013/judgments-by-club/aviva-premiership/~/media/files/2013/discipline/judgments/aviva%20premiership/cockerillleicestertigersjudgmentjuly13.ashx

 

[Ian_Cook]

I wonder if this one will be appealed:

http://www.rfu.com/thegame/discipline/judgements/judgments-2012-2013/judgments-by-club/aviva-premiership/~/media/files/2013/discipline/judgments/aviva%20premiership/cockerillleicestertigersjudgmentjuly13.ashx

Looking at Paras 6 and 7, I'd say Cockerill got off lightly!

Worse yet, while he may have had a point regarding the first tackle*, if I recall correctly, most of this outburst came after Flood got injured in the second tackle, which IMO wasn't late (Croft was clearly already committed) and in any case. Flood's injury was actually caused by his head colliding with the knee of a team-mate (Dan Cole?)

NOTE: *just because I said he had a point does not mean I endorse his behaviour in any way.

 

[damo]

He sounds like a twat in every sense of the word and the sort of coach you dread having to referee each week.

 

[Davet]

Possibly the sort of twat who went eyeball to eyeball with NZ during the haka performance.

He has never taken prisoners, and passion and commitment seem to rule him. Not a gentleman - but then Leicester isn't really a place renowned for southern softies.

Prickly, awkward and yes, the sort of bloke whom refs may well feel a bit worried about - but - at premisership level - that's probably part of his job. If he can get refs thinking about a possible reaction, then maybe they will be a little wary of the contentious call.

Though - at premiership level - the refs are probably made of stern enough stuff not to worry about it too much.

Nature's arms race, predator vs prey, at its finest - You can decide which is which.

 

[damo]

I have some sympathy with that view, though I would prefer it if every coach was required to not be uncivil with the officials. A coach that secures any advantage from the referees that they can is ideal.

At premiership level I'm sure you are right that the referees are tough enough (and paid well enough) to handle it. It still isn't a good look, and it will also filter down to coaches at lower levels, where referees are not always tough enough, and don't have the support that the top guys have, and will likely just give it up if they are subject to that sort of confrontation every time they make a decision.

 

[Davet]

Damo - yes I do agree.

But the stakes at Premiership level are so much higher than at Old Bogcastrians extra 4ths.

But it is important that refs have sufficient self belief to stand up to the challenges they get from coaches and players.

Which is where Society training sessions are vital - and places like this - where refs can be equipped with the knowledge that they are right, and the confidence and self-belief to enforce action against dissent - and the security that come fdrom knowing, a) it's not just them, and b) their peers also enforce action against dissent.

I don't think we need a silo mentality, us vs the world (a la Brendan Venter at Saracens) - but we do need to have the collective confidence to enable us to stand tall and not be browbeaten.

 

[Phil E]

We have two major concerns. The first is that in 2009 Mr. Cockerill accepted that his disparaging remarks concerning the competition and its officiating had been wrong. He was contrite, apologised and maintained that it would not happen again. In 2013, he received a written warning and within a matter of months was involved in this incident. Our second major concern was that when giving evidence Mr. Cockerill maintained that the use of the words “f***” and “f*****g” were justified in the circumstances. He also maintained that players who swear at Referees need not be sent off or disciplined. His use of swear words which he did not deny did not, he maintained, make his actions aggressive, obscene, inappropriate or unprofessional. Certain of the game’s core values, namely respect, discipline and sportsmanship, seem to us to have passed Mr. Cockerill by.

Unbelievable, I think he got off light considering his previous.

 

[Skids]

It is a shame when an obviously highly talented coach descends into such emotive and senseless behaviour. Worse still his contention that using those words is not relevant.

I agree, very lucky to get only what he did.

£500 fine? Pointless. Pocket-money to someone like him and no deterrent or additional punishment at all.