Jalapeno your statement about WP players.

 You made the following hysterical comment about Etzebeth:

"Why is it that whenever theres a eye gouging incident its always one of the filthy WP thugs? Corne Krige, Schalk Burger and now eben Etzebeth.

An eye gouge is one of the most cowardly things someone can do on the rugby field. Says a lot about the WP mentality!!!!!"

Given he has been totally cleared of the flimsy accusation, now would be a good time to apologize to Etzebeth and WP players in general. Lets see if you can be big and admit you were guilty of early, snide mouth.

Mozart

I don thimk the Dumbo will respond to you above message.   He re-acts to a baseless accusation and make it out to be factual.   What else do you expect from a Bull supporter?

Well perhaps he can just change his nick again.....the Fruit thing is pretty shot after this.

Ou jallopy has crashed but please guys understand jallopy's bent sense of humour! Should I be saying rooitwits bent sense of humour. Anyhow plenty, plenty egg for jallopy /rooitwit - an egg magnet for sure!

No sense of humour there, just anger and envy. A sick individual..

Still waiting for your apology....Benoni.

Hypocrite alert!! Mike it's a bit rich for you to post on this thread when you've not apologised the Crusaders team for the baseless eye gouging claims made against them.

poi-e

I don't think an apology is necessary in this case.   There was medial evidence that an attempt at eye-gouging was made and the result was that the wound caused had to be treated medically.

The fact that they could not excatly determine who did it and there was insufficeint television evidence - resulted in a no guilty verdict.    That does not mean untoward conduct did not take place - all medical indicarions are it in fact did - so no apolofy is forthcmoing.

Moffie fresh coming from you asking someone to be big enough - this from the wanker who has called me a turncoat because I predict a Pom win - but that aside, you are really bloody stupid if you think Jal was being serious. He so has your number old fart

Wigboy, surely not even u are so dumb u cant see Etzebeths intention. Have another look:

Hes trying to eye gouge the Scotish player but hes so clumsy he misses.

I think these citings should be based on the intention rather then on whether he gets his fingers into the other players eyes or not. I allways get pissed off when a punch is reported and the ref asks if the player connected or not. Who cares if he connected, its the intention. Same thing here. Etzebeth should be banned along with all the other violent WP thugs. Disgracefull!!!!!!!

 Last reply from me to the Bitterbal fruit. Your hatred makes you a traitor. Fools like you will always find a reason to feed their demon, thats why the world is a swamp at best most of the time. Luckely there are others to make it a littlebetter and keep it from going to hell. 

Fruit if you knew anything about rugby you'd realise Etzebeth is trying to hold the player up......apologize like a man.

Jal, be a big man for Moffie as he is such an example to us all!!

You can stop the fawning fat man, the Bitter Fruit isn't RooiAas. More than likely he is the Benoni boy Taipan....who, as I recall, thought you were a moron.

Moffie it might be that I know exactly who he is. Either way, he has your number, much like I do

Sure with picks like Greyling, Hougaard at 9 , Taute the test loser at 13 and Mvovo at wing .....you have my number...haha.

You see there you go again, complete bullshit.......let me guess, I picked Greyling ahead of Beast???

Hougaard at 9 - always

So after 3 tests at 13 for Taute you have him as a loser - ignorance at play again. Fact is Taute was good at 13 against Oz and Ireland and average against NZ - only a complete an utter idiot would conclude from this that Taute was a loser at 13.

Mvovo is a quality wing.

Why not extend your anti SA players list given its your forte..........hell look no further than our fullbacks for instance - Kirchner and Ludik, you keep bashing both......I could start on the wings, centres.....but I dont have the staying power in these fingers.

Lets just pick up on your wonderful picks - Adi at 13, or the return of past it Joubert at 13, Bosman at 10, BJ at 3, Johan Muller at 4, past it Joe at 8......real prize assets this lot. Today its de Jongh another Adi call

Well let's see. I never picked Bosman at centre....ever. Adi was arguably the best 13 in the 2008 TN, he made a number of the all TN teams. Joubert was our best 13 since readmission. Muller was a back up lock, but a way smarter player than your man Flip Flop. Joe is the only recent  Bok number 8 that could corner flag and a huge factor in our 2004 TN win, when he targeted Andrew Mehrtens in the home test.

So my calls were generally ok.....backed up by the fact these players were selected again and again....as opposed to your two strikes and they're out crew.

Um, I said Bosman at 10, Adi was never the best centre at any time, you wanted Joubert and Joe back when they had past it. Muller was a bog ordinary lock with no clout, Flip is far better and our best 13 since readmission is Fourie by some distance and if you put that to the vote, supporters the world over would tell you just that - FACT

Well Dave believe what you like, you scarcely count.  The main point here is the Fruit should apologize for saying Etzebeth is a dirty player. Let him know will ya?

I take it you do count then?

Nah, I don't. I express my opinions on here for my satisfaction. But I have no illusions about their efficacy.....and I would never start a thread with a heading like Give Meyer An Ultimatum.....a fantasy ultimatum, how pathetic!

 Oh ok Mike, so any injury to the eye on the rugby field has to be the result of an intentional eye gouge...there's wasnt a shred of evidence to suggest an eye gouge, no footage, no track record, and if I recall no injury, no citing...there was more grounds for citing Ezebeth, so for you to demand an apology from Jalapeno when you've done exactly the same thing makes you look a right cock...yet again.

Pooo circumstantial evidence- ever heard of it! Balance of probability etc.

As for Etzebeth it is clear that when he realised - all in a brief moment of time - that his hands were on the face he removed them.

Pooo worry about Thompson who is in the dwang it seems for a relatively minor offence in my view.

Still the abs are widely recognised to get off easily for some weird reason.Remember Bob Dywers immortal stats. Abs 43 penalties to 1 yellow. Oz 7 penalties to one yellow and boks 6 penalties to one yellow. If that doent give you pause to wonder nothing will.

Let hope that keeps ou pooo quiet!

 I'm struggling to digest the sheer stupidity of the post above this one..truly.

poi-e

There were serious scratches virtually on the eyelid below the eye.   Scratchmarks come from the nails of players - not from anything else.   The player concerned objected and laid a charge of eye-gouging and had the medical records to support it.   However, it was not clear from the video material who was the guilty party and when and how did it happen.   Fact - it did happen - and the player who did it can thank his lucky stars for that.

While I am at it - that dumb bunny Retallick should get a talk about spear tackles and off-the ball- play - he really is on dangerous ground.   That - however - is normal with a sub-par player trying to impress people.

I'm struggling to digest the sheer stupidity of the post above this one..truly.

poi-e,  yr not the only one struggling. i think u have 2 be v stupid if u hope 2 make sense of anything Baboon-ou says.

If u dont look something like the picture above, I doubt yr going to understand what Baboon-ou is trying to say.

It did happen did it? Then surely you have the evidence to support it, some footage perhaps? You're too damn thick to smell your own hypocrisy, you're up in arms when a SA player is accused with footage to support it may need another look, but ready to condemn the crusaders without a shred of evidence short of supposed scratches around the eye, dishonest much?

 Looking at that video a few times, their is actually a moment where Ezbeth has his finger upon the eye area. He did not appear to Gouge, and I am sure that he had no intention to actually Gouge. If he wanted to Gouge he probably could have given that his fingers were placed in the eye area. If anything the tackle is high and it is a bit reckless. However if we looked at every tackle in slow motion we would see many tackles going high at least for a brief moment as the tackler tries to grip on the player with the ball- not so easy when the player is not stationery, with his own players pushing him as well as players from the defending team also running into the maul.

Crusaders coach Todd Blackadder says he expects an apology from the Bulls after eye-gouging allegations against his team couldn't be substantiated by the Super Rugby citing commissioner.

Bulls forwards Chiliboy Ralepelle and Flip van der Merwe complained to referee Jaco Peyper that they had been eye-gouged during their match in Pretoria, won 32-30 by the Bulls. Peyper used a white card to refer the incidents to the citing commissioner.

SANZAR chief executive Greg Peters said today the commissioner had reviewed video footage of the match from several camera angles not available to the television viewers and had found there was no case to answer.

"The citing commissioner has reviewed it and after that review there was nothing in the video footage that would point to the allegation being substantiated," Peters said.

"The citing commissioner also found it interesting that the Bulls did not follow through with a complaint within the four-hour window after the game."

Blackadder said it was obvious even from a cursory examination of the evidence that there was no case to answer.

"The first one with Chiliboy, you would expect that the player would come out of the breakdown holding his eye, but he certainly didn't. I wonder whether it was a negative ploy," he said.

Crusaders captain Kieran Read was disappointed the allegations had been made.

"Initially I was really surprised at the allegations," he said. "It has now come out that there's no case to answer.

"It's a kick in the guts to us because we're men of integrity and it's no surprise that it's turned out the way it has."

Blackadder said he was concerned the white card system, introduced to Super Rugby for the first time this season, could be used by teams to make spurious allegations against opponents.

Peters said he doubted that was the case but he said no action would be taken against the Bulls players who made the allegations against the Crusaders.

Making false allegations would be regarded as bringing the game into disrepute.

"If we thought they were making them on a vexatious basis then we would certainly be asking some questions," he said. "But in the heat of the battle it's hard for a player to always know exactly what's happened and that's the purpose of the white card."

               Offender                 Victim            Ban      For   Against

i must admit the louw stomping on the head looks worse to me than ebens incident. louw looked at the player then just lightly raised his foot. that can be citied as being intentional but he got away with it.

Crusaders captain Kieran Read was disappointed the allegations had been made.

"Initially I was really surprised at the allegations," he said. "It has now come out that there's no case to answer.

"It's a kick in the guts to us because we're men of integrity and it's no surprise that it's turned out the way it has."  9Wha ta drama queen kieran - you protes ttoo much methings - no oscar for this hamming of the victim role)

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA  has to be the funniest post ever. 

So where did those marks that Mike mentioned come from.? Further, is there any record of Chilli Boy or Flip making such allegations at any time in their career. Is there any recod of the bulle laying false charges or being a side that squeals - NO.

Listen to the voice of reason:

If we thought they were making them on a vexatious basis then we would certainly be asking some questions," he said. "But in the heat of the battle it's hard for a player to always know exactly what's happened and that's the purpose of the white card."

So cease all your villaneous slurs re the bulle please as there is no cause for that at all re these incidents.

Also just because the camera doesnt pick things up that is not conclusive. Much more realistic to think Chilli boy got those marks as suggested than to believe they were self inflicted. Some oaks are clutching at straws!

Jallopy you are now sounding a bit like rooitwit - conclusion you are the son of rooitwit and the high pitched bedpan! Bwahahahahaha love that Baboon pic!!!!

This would be the dumbest statement!

By Zeena Isaacs, 30 June

Johannesburg — SA's self-proclaimed "God-given talent", Springbok coach Peter de Villiers, yesterday defended flank Schalk Burger after his eight-week ban for eye-gouging, saying rugby was a contact sport and those not up for it should take up ballet.

The coach also appears to have forgotten his line on Saturday night that the Springboks would be "humble in victory" and claimed that the media focus on the eye-gouging incident rather than the series victory stemmed from Lions supporters struggling to come to grips with losing the series.is one of the dumbest statements ever!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye-gouging_%28rugby_union%29

look at some of those bans...the one bloke got 2 years ?????

allblacknblue ou pdv was surely the dumbest coach ever to coach an international rugby team or even any rugby team! No sane person will try to defend against your assertion.

However you should be  delighted he took over from Jake as it ment the Boks never remotely achieved what was possible after the WC win. Further it landed Meyer in a pickle as well. However he was very funny and not as a person a bad guy. 

 What a surprise, no comment from Mike the coward...

poi-e

What do you want me to comment on? I have said in the past that De Villiers statements on issues relating to rugby matters were crazy and I see no reasons to differ from mt previous comments.   The article quoted above is typical of his ranting and raving. There i really nothing further that I could add to my preious comments on that issue.

 Some comment on your own hypocrisy perhaps first...

poi-e

What hypocrisy?   I said there was medical and photgrpahic indications that there was proof of ontoward behavoiour by Crusaders players - but that it could not be proved who did it and when.  There is no hyprocisy in that statement.

Incidentally you did not comment on what I said about Retallick?   So I may as well question your hypocrisy.   Any comment about that very average player and his off-the ball play to off-set his minimal talents?