With the news (as yet unconfirmed) that Guy Dinwoodie has been suspended for 2 years by the Board's Disciplinary Commitee, questions are being asked by some, as to the rationale behind the decision. It is not our place to question the commitee's decision on this, as we are not aware of the facts. However, it does seem to us that if the charge of abusing officials goes unchecked, then we start to fail in our obligations to all concerned within the game. The constant sniping and abuse that is aimed at the Union and members of the board by people within the game, is also unacceptable and if the perpetrators are known, then they should also be brought to book, for bringing the game into disrepute. This is a charge that is quite often used in other sports and can be aimed at an individual, club or both and if found guilty the punishment can be suspensions, bans, fines etc. We are not arguing against free speech, as that is a fundamental right of everybody. However, inappropriate language, personal abuse on those elected or in senior positions within the game, should not be tolerated and if it happens, the culprits should be charged. As noted elswhere, certain people have their own agenda and may still be bitter at their demise, who knows? However part of a comment left on another blog may suggest that others feel as we do, we print it here for your perusal,
" Of course the other way of looking at it Guy along with Neil is one of the reasons that Swedish rugby is going backwards. Since their times as National coaches they have done nothing but accuse the Union of ineptitude and slack practice when in fact the Union has been guilty of nothing more than inaction". So, we support the Board in seeking to maintain the good name of rugby and charging those that transgress.
Toadies
ReplyDeleteMost eloquently put, obviously you are of a differing opinion than ours and that is your right. However, if you could manage to look at the broader picture and ignore personalities, you may discover that this great game of ours depends on discipline and respect. Not only from players, but coaches and administrators as well. No matter how you may feel about a referee, touch judge or official, you cannot berate or abuse them. It is totally unacceptable and if you think that we are toadies because of our view, so be it.
ReplyDeleteI have only ever heard "this great game of ours" used by pompous, condescending bigots defending their outrageous views. Or toadies trying to emulate them.
ReplyDeleteIt is of course complete nonesense to say you cannot berate referees no matter what they do. Aggressive one sided refereeing brings into disrespect all games, great or otherwise. Frankly, I'd much rather have Guy defending the game than you.
On the first point, if they are the only people you have heard state that view, you should get out more often! If you believe that we are toadies for supporting the Board in their right to maintain the disciplinary standards that are required in rugby, then you have that right to that view and we have a right to ours. We might also point out that as we did on our post, 'we do not have the facts of the case and therefore cannot comment on it'. Obviously, you do. If we were in possession of them and we believed that the Board had acted unfairly, we would state that point.
ReplyDeleteOn the second point, the place to discuss the referee's performance is in the club house after the game with him, and as a coach if you are not happy with the response, then put it in writing to the appropriate Board member/s. Berating referees is not acceptable and to be frank does not get you anywhere. Finally, ours was not an attack on Guy, it was a point of view expressed using part of a comment, which delivered a view left by someone else on another blog, is that person also a toady?
Should a coach be punished for verbally abusing a referee: Yes
ReplyDeleteShould a coach be handed a 2 year ban for verbally abusing a referee: No
The punishment handed out is far too excessive.
Nice use of the counter-intuitive quote. BTW "Inaction" is not a compliment.
ReplyDeleteOne aspect that you haven't addressed is the apparent breach of procedure in the case.
The usual process seems to have been short circuited and the appeal process then handed upward to another body.
Given that there does not appear to have been a disciplinary tribunal where the "accused" was permitted to defend himself it seems a seems a bit strange.
Furthermore how much sense does it make that a coach of an SM final team is given a retrospective ban that would have prevented him from attending the final in his capacity as coach.
Does that mean that he breached the conditions of his ban and will receive an extension?
Discipline is vital to the game and treatment of the officials is integral to that but, like all these things two wrongs does not make a right.
If justice is to be administered it must be transparent and seen to be transparent;otherwise it is not justice it is retribution.
No question,if you slag the ref of and threaten him, then you got to take the punishment!
ReplyDeleteA ban is correct, but it has to be in proportion to all the rest. For exampel the vänersborg player who verbaly abused the ref in the changing room after the game and his ban was 1 month!!!So I can't really see who GUy can get 2 years.
ReplyDeleteSometimes people forget the responsability of the SRF. Putting people in positions of athority that are not qualified nor have the competence without thinking of the cosequences.
ReplyDeleteYou may comment all you will about this situation but remember Lies usualy come back and bite you.
By the way my name is Guy what is yours?
You are not only "supporting the Board in their right to maintain the disciplinary standards that are required in rugby" you are also by implication supporting them whatever they do. You say they are right and at the same time you say you don't know the facts. Unquestioning loyalty to authority. Yes definitely toadies
ReplyDeleteWe have to disagree with you. Of course the Board need to be supported in their right to maintain disciplinary standards, which we do. However we have never stated that the Board do not have the facts regarding Guy's case, we stated that we do not have them, and we guess neither do you, and therefore cannot comment on it. To suggest that we will support them in whatever they do is really childish.
ReplyDeleteIf anyne wants to take part of the facts you just have to mail the union. It is all public information. It would be interresting to see how the discussion in the DN went and how they came to get where they got in this question.
ReplyDeleteMy name is Forrest Gump.... Life is like a box of chocolates......
ReplyDeleteHeineken, you obviously are part of the establishment. I would not be surprised if you were the moped rider himself or someone close to him. Don't forget your own rules about name calling. I am not and what I said is not childish. You just don't like it. You need not get defensive about your loyalty to the establishment, no doubt they offer you something you need.
ReplyDeleteThank you for that comment, says it all really. But who is this moped rider you speak of? We suggested the view was childish, not necessarily you. Your last sentence is we think, also of a similar vein. Thanks for the comment though.
ReplyDeleteWhat the establishment offer to toadies is recognition and vicarious influence. In return you blindly support them whatever they do. Of course you do think they are right - that delusion is convenient. It's tragic and pathetic not childish. I suspect that by now you are beginning to think that I may be right but your self interests will no doubt fortify your prejudiced opinions.
ReplyDeleteWhat is a moped rider?
ReplyDeleteWhat is a moped?
ReplyDeleteWelshOne your English is usually immaculate. However, "two wrongs" is definitely plural so they do not make a right.
ReplyDeletehmmm i see its time to start picking on guy time again..well where will i start .GUY has been my friend for over 35 years so i think i know him pretty well.and yes he can get a bit over excited at times but he only does that because he loves the game of rugby.and at the same time has a great knowledge an understanding of the game than most ppl have and is respected in scotland & england by both refs and international player.so for you to ban him for 2 years for some abuse of a ref is just a JOKE.u call yourself a Board Disciplinary Commitee.LOL.LIKE GUY SAID YOUR LIES WILL COME BACK TO BIT YOUR ASS.PSguy has forgotten more about the game as u will ever know......He.Who.Hingeth.Aboot.Getith.Hee.Haw
ReplyDeleteI like Guy. He's honest.Even if he has a temper.
ReplyDelete