Rugby videos of tackles, tries, funny incidents and more: Sergio Parisse suspended for eight weeks for eye-gouge

Monday, June 29, 2009

Sergio Parisse suspended for eight weeks for eye-gouge

Italian captain Sergio Parisse has been suspended for eight weeks after an eye-gouging incident during his teams 27-6 loss to New Zealand on Saturday.

Parisse was cited after TV replays showed that he made contact with the eyes of All Black lock Isaac Ross in the second half.

He appeared before a IRB judicial officer in Christchurch and was punished following television footage and reports from the match referee and linesmen.

They found that he had not acted intentionally, but deemed his actions to be reckless. He was charged with the lower range offence, which carries a recommended sentence of 12 weeks.

It was reduced to eight weeks because of mitigating circumstances, as they noted that the initial contact with Ross had been on his cheek, before the hand slipped to the eye, causing only brief contact.

Ross was also unharmed, which helped Parisse’s cause, as did the fact that in 65 Test matches, he’s never been yellow or red carded.

Parisse’s suspension will be delayed until the start of the Italian club season. He will be eligible to resume playing in late September.

Lets hear your thoughts
This is second suspension of the weekend for eye-gouging. Is the punishment for this offence too lenient, or is 8 to 12 weeks fair?

Time: 01:15
Please Note: We're trying to clean up the comments to make things more pleasant for all. Please comply with the site rules. Thanks.

Absolutely disgraceful. The IRB needs to change the rules and ban these idiots for 1 year for first offense, second offense = lifetime ban.

I don't understand why fabulous players like Parisse and Burger want to damage their reputation by doing these cowardly and idiotic acts.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 4:39 pm
Burger can't damage his reputation : he's already famous for that.

By Dalma, at June 29, 2009 4:44 pm
i completely agree with u guys. I dnt know why this disgracefull behaviour is creeping into our game. Parisse did it wen the ref was concentrating on the fight also. (i had fingers in my eyes the other week in a game, and its not nice)

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 4:46 pm
Burger has always been a filthy player but i expected better from parisse. Gouging is sneaky & dangerous and deserves a much longer ban.
Ive never seen burger do anything to bigger guys than him, i cant stand the guy.

By Un-Dutch-Able, at June 29, 2009 4:50 pm
That's a disgrace. I'm really taken aback by that one as I consider(ed) Parisse to be a real giant of the game, and one who does not offend its spirit.

I think 8 weeks is ridiculously lenient. What is it going to take to get the correct (heavy) suspensions flowing from these assaults ? A serious eye injury ?

I would give Parisse, and indeed Burger, no less than a six month vacation, and I am not averse to the idea that a year is appropriate.

By Eoghan, at June 29, 2009 4:54 pm
Do you remember when that SA prop Johan Le Roux bit Sean Fitzpartick's ear in 1994?

There was outrage and he was given a 18 month ban!

Where's the comparable sentence for gouging?

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 5:01 pm
Un-Dutch-Able, there arent many bigger guys than Burger, thats probably why. ;)

But seriously, Burger is a quality player who plays the game like it used to be played. He doesnt hold back, puts his body on the line and has amazing fitness levels for such a heavy guy. He IS a worldclass forward. IRB player of the year, world cup winner, and man of the match on many occasions.

He's never done anything like this before. In the past it's always just been overzealous behaviour.. using his physicality etc. I've never seen him punch anybody, or even get involved in a proper fight.

People make mistakes in the heat of the moment, just as your boy Alan Quinlan did. It happens.

That said, effin stupid thing to do, not only for himself, but for his team and country. Deserves the punishment.

By Dave, at June 29, 2009 5:05 pm
Kevin Yates got 6 months for biting on Simon Fenn's ear in 1998.

Where's the comparable sentence for gouging?

Richard Loe did get 6 months for eye gouging Greg Cooper back in 1992, in a Waikato v Otago game.

Seems like we are going backwards!

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 5:10 pm
as a Lions fan I have watched Burger play many times, and unlike Botha, he is not a dirty player, just hard and fair......until now.

So I don't agree that Burger has a history of foul play.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 5:11 pm
fair punishment in my opinion. Parisse looked as if he wanted to push the guys face and not gouge. I think Parisse will appreciate the rest considering the amount of rugby he has played.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 5:26 pm
Agree with the last comment - Parisse appears to be pushing the guys face - and he doesn't appear to be intent on hurting the guy. He's also looking to get the officials attention, so why he would do so as he deliberately made contact with the eye is beyond me.

I would guess that his 8 week ban has come about principally because of Burgers ban. That these two incidents have been treated the same is beyond eblief.

By Hackney Griffin, at June 29, 2009 5:52 pm
this one is not as bad as burger one. he should have a lot more than 8 weeks for his one on fitzgearld.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 5:56 pm
Eoghan, good point on two counts. First that I am surprised Parisse has lowered himself to committing one of the worst acts possible on a rugby field. In the cases of Burger and Parisse attacking the eyes achieved nothing. The ban should be in the region of 8 - 12 months, not 8 - 12 weeks.

Secondly, I'm afraid you are correct that it may well take a serious eye injury for the IRB to take notice of this! If we, as the people who love this great sport, make enough noise and show our disgust at this then maybe the IRB will listen. It needs constant pressure from the press too.

I've played the game for 15 years now and it has not once entered my head to poke my fingers into the eye socket of another player. I can understand, although not condone, a shove or a punch can be in the 'heat of the moment' as it is a sudden explosion of aggression/adrenaline. But a gouge is far more premeditated and requires far more precison so I don't see it as a 'heat of the moment' type offence.

Interested to see who agrees.

By Brighty, at June 29, 2009 5:56 pm
I completely agree. That the IRB deem both offences worthy of the same punishment is crazy.

Parisse seems to unintentionally touch his finger to the corner of Ross's eye who then melodramatically overreacts.

Whereas Burger goes beyond the first knuckle into Fitz's eye for more than a second.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 6:02 pm
I think in this case the punishment is not too harsh since Prisse probably didn't even realize he was gouging. However a player's hand shouldn't be in the face of his opponent in the first place. not in a ruck, nor in a maul, nor in a scrum. Maybe you should penalize the gougers by giving them boxing gloves for a few months^^

By augenwurm, at June 29, 2009 6:03 pm
Putting my lawyer cap on I think that hand and fingers in the eyes needs to be a "strict liability" offense.

In other words, it doesn’t matter if you meant to break the law or not, you can still be convicted of the offense. The most common types of strict liability crimes might include parking violations (it doesn’t matter if you intended to park in the wrong place, it only matters that you did); the sale of alcohol or tobacco to a minor (it doesn’t matter if you knew or didn’t know that the buyer was a minor, it only matters that he or she was); and statutory rape (again, it doesn’t matter if you didn’t know that the victim was a minor, it only matters that he or she was).
Conversely, most crimes require that you “knowingly” committed the act, or in other words, had the intent to commit the crime.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 6:09 pm
Parisse's gouge was no where near as bad as burgers

By ybr, at June 29, 2009 6:14 pm
Great points Eoghan and Brighty. Completely agree with you guys. I have to say althought Burger's offence was much worse then the likes of Parisse's or Quinlan's the intent to do somthing like that deserves at least an 8 Month ban regardless who or what your reputation is. Disgusting play.

Conor (Ireland & Munster supporter)

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 6:34 pm
Parisse and Burger are night and day in terms of reputation. Advantage Parisse.

Parisse's gouge is more obvious due to the camera work. Advantage Burger.

Parisse's gouge appears to be a more distinct and separate act than Burgers. One might argue Burger's was associated with the tackle. Advantage Burger.

Parisse's contact was much shorter. Burger looks to be trying to take home a six-pack of beer from the bottle store. Advantage Parisse.

It really does bother me that a man who has always been a positive role model in rugby (Parisse) is getting the same punishment as a man (Burger) who is infamous for "playing on the edge" (read: let the chips, heads, necks, eyeballs, fall where they may).

However, take the two men out of act itself, and Parisse's act just appears more malicious than Burgers.

By cheyanqui, at June 29, 2009 6:36 pm
I was about to post how shocked I am at some of the views of the two incidents, but then saw Cheyanqui's comment.. thank god. Clearly someone who isnt as one eyed as the guys who commented before him.

To me this incident is far worse, but still doesnt cause any harm. Burgers was part of wrestling on the floor, while Parisse clearly put his fingers into Ross' face/eyes.

I totally agree that this is worse than Burgers.

By FrankyH, at June 29, 2009 6:40 pm
Am I the only one who doesn't see the finger actually in the eye??

I mean, maybe it was an attempt or the angle was bad, but int he last slowmotion he barely reaches to the right eye...

I think 8 week ban is fine...

By Nick, at June 29, 2009 6:43 pm
When i saw this live i thought 'hello 6 month ban sergio' BUT seeing it there it does seem its not deliberate and is just trying to grab his face. Parisse is NOT that type of player. I think 8 weeks is fair, more a reminder of his responsibilities and as someone else mentioned, may be a much-needed break. But if that's 8 weeks, Burger's should be 28 weeks!

Nobody can say they were surprised at other convicts of eye-gouging (see Neil Best, Alan Quinlan, Schalk Burger) but to see Parisse was a genuine shock.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 6:47 pm
man! its not like he seriously gouge issac eyes!.. its just at the side of the eye. so it shouldnt be that long!

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 7:04 pm
Has Burger always been a dirty player? Often stupid yes. Reckless yes. But I was rather surprised that he did such a dastardly act.

Can't remember him ever throwing a punch, tripping or lifting and dropping a player. Which is weird. Why do it now?

By Wessel, at June 29, 2009 7:11 pm
rubish, when u look at the replay, you see its unintentionnal and it the contact why the side of the eye hardly lasts two seconds.
one week ban, max is two cos this is tiny compared to burger's intentional eye-gouge on luke fitzgerald

By luxi, at June 29, 2009 7:12 pm
Ok, first off, gouging is a despicable act and should carry a heavier ban - if anyone on my team was ever responsible for doing that I'd kick their f@*king ar$e off the team faster than you can say 'cheating little git'.

That said, Parisse's incident was borderline - shouldn't be going anywhere enar his face, but the guy made a meal out of it IMHO.

Secondly, if Parrise got 8 weeks for that then why the hell did Burger get the same length ban - his was so much more viscious and there is obvious intent. I am absolutely disgusted with De Villiers comments in defence of Burgers actions.

FrankyH & Co. - How on earth is this worse than Burgers? are you a SA fan?

That said, there has been alot recently - Quinlan, Hartley, Best, Burger, Corry. Lets cut it out guys, you're privelidged enough to play the game we love for a living. They need to be reminded of that sometimes.

By RichW, at June 29, 2009 7:25 pm
Must say, when looking again this looks like a deliberate gouge. Especially the last flick if the finger.

Weird stuff by a great player. Will live to regret it like Burger.

By Wessel, at June 29, 2009 7:25 pm
'Someone having a crack at Isaac', are these commentators stupid or something? The Italian captain, and arguably the best number 8 in the world, he can see his face clearly, and he still doesn't know who it is.

By Kearney for tests, at June 29, 2009 7:26 pm
Wessel, Burger clothslined a Fijian player in the air during the World Cup.

By Kearney for tests, at June 29, 2009 7:28 pm
"Burger clothslined a Fijian player in the air during the World Cup."

Nope, I think you mean a Samoan player. And as usual if you watch that incident Burger has no idea, where his arms, and more importantly the ball is.

Burger is a very uncoordinated bull in a china shop. He's an octopus with no motor functions. Which is why he cant pass or catch.

Sad beginning of the end of a good career. Brussow is far better.

By Wessel, at June 29, 2009 7:36 pm
"why the hell did Burger get the same length ban - his was so much more viscious and there is obvious intent."

How can you say that? On the video of burger you cant even see the gouging incident that clearly.

Parisse had clear intent, his hands were directed at the face of a player who is otherwise not even touching him.

In Burgers case theres no knowing whether Burger, who was facing away even knew what his hands were holding onto. Whether he even knew who the player was.

By Wessel, at June 29, 2009 7:39 pm
Gouging is disgracefull and has no place in the game, any evidence of deliberate gouging should receive a very lengthy ban. BUT: RD states
"They found that he had not acted intentionally, but deemed his actions to be reckless." If an unintentional action can be prosecuted for 8 weeks does that mean every player accidentally treading on an opponent will get the same ban as a player who stamps on opposition. Parisse has a 8 week ban, the same as that of Burger, are the two offences of the same nature, I think not. Something to ponder!

By muzza - PRFC, at June 29, 2009 7:51 pm
"On the video of burger you cant even see the gouging incident that clearly."

Are you taking the p!ss?! The camera man is focussing directly on them! You couldn't get clearer. Unbelievable bias.

"In Burgers case theres no knowing whether Burger, who was facing away even knew what his hands were holding onto. Whether he even knew who the player was"

What kind of defence is that?! I don't think he would care less if he knew or not who he was clearing out!! Burger knew exactly what he was doing and exactly where his hands and fingers were, and anyone who argues to the contrary is just plain deluded.

By RichW, at June 29, 2009 7:56 pm
As a Italian, I say:

Parisse deserved his 8 wks ban.

But Schalk Burger incident was much worst: the contact with Fitz's eyes was much longer and heavy!
Schalk Burger must be banned for 12wks at least!

And I really can't understand why players do such things! Do they need that for playing better??
Do they think that in a 14 cameras stadium, no one would see them??!

Ahh... stupid!
Very stupid!

And f*ck, Burger "al least yellow" foul surely costs to Lions the match!

By Madflyhalf, at June 29, 2009 8:01 pm
RichW is completely right it doesnt matter if he didnt know where his hands where thats complete balls hes still going to feel a squishy thing on the end of his finger(Luke Fitzgearld's eye!!) i mean come on his intent was as clear as day in both cases

Conor

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 8:07 pm
lol

One thing I can say is this, and none of you can dispute it - the camera angles and clarity on the Parisse incident is ten times better than on the Burger incident.

On the Burger incident we basically see one angle, and it's from pretty far out. How you lot can say that you can see what his fingers are doing, and compare the two in that way, is beyond me.

It's a bit like the Fourie try (that you all moaned about too). It was PRESUMED that he scored, so it was given. In this case, it is presumed that he badly eye gouged. So he's guilty of being the biggest pr*ck around. But you hated the presumption on the Fourie try, so how can you now happily presume with this?

My point is that it's easy to view things from one side only, and refuse to step back and try see things objectively.

By FrankyH, at June 29, 2009 8:17 pm
IMO Burger can be banned for lifetime, I don't care, he's a disgrace for our Boks! With about every match there was some sort of "issue" with him. He should grow up! and be a REAL Bok!

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 8:29 pm
Really did not expect Parisse to do this.
But 8 weeks is a joke if Neil Best got 18 weeks in the start of the seoson for something that was judged "accidental eye-goughing".

Although I like Parisse really much as a player who brings his country to a higher level every year, this can not be called "accidental" I am sorry but if ol' Neil got 18 weeks this and the Burger one is at least 20-25 weeks not?

By Proppie, at June 29, 2009 8:46 pm
Take a look at the first few seconds, Parisse is appealing to the ref to get Ross out from their Italy's side of the maul. The referee does nothing and is distracted by the two scrapping on the floor. Parisse sees this and takes the opportunity to go dangerously near the eyes out of frustration to get Ross out.
The ref should've been dealing with it, but didn't, so Parisse did it himself.
I'm absolutely astounded that he'd do this, he is an absolute pillar of the world game, holding together a very average team, and allowing them to get near competitive. He's an absolute gent, and this was a moment of madness, not pre-meditated or unprovoked like Burger's.
I am Parisse's biggest fan, but there's not much defending this, other than saying that the ref should've acted so he didn't feel the need to take it into his owns hands.
Jim

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 8:56 pm
Yes fair enough Parisse should not have done that but that is nowhere near as bad as what Burger did. Parisse did not get nearly as heavy a connection - the IRB needs to be more consistent about this.

By 212, at June 29, 2009 8:57 pm
8 weeks during the summer is a pathetic punishment to both burger and parisse

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 9:03 pm
genuine shock to see parisse do this as other have said.

'In Burgers case theres no knowing whether Burger, who was facing away even knew what his hands were holding onto. Whether he even knew who the player was'

worst defence of the act yet. you know immediately what your hands are touching, the shape of the eye socket and feel of the eye would be instantly recognisable. had they not meant to be there he we have got his hands away immediately. he didnt. end of argument.

People who have seen Living with lions will remember the selection for the 3rd test where they speak about the 2nd test and the tactic used with Venter stamping on someone legs and joost VDW trying to gouge dawson and jim telfer makes the point that you dont turn into a dirty player overnight. You dont gouge on the international scene if you havent done it before at some lower level. Take note of this when seeing parisses and burgers actions here

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 9:11 pm
"8 weeks during the summer is a pathetic punishment to both burger and parisse"

Parisse's punishement starts at the beginni9ng of the domestic season at least.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 9:15 pm
I can't believe that he was initially given 12 weeks, when Burger was initially only given 8 on an incident that was much more obvious and intentional. I'm happy to see it reduced to 8 weeks, but am saddened to see that Parisse commit such an act, considering his stature and talent. He's not an idiot or a thug, and to brand him such is ignorant.

Moreover, to ban a player for a year for eye-gouging, or any offense (beyond drug-related issues), is foolhardy at best. Each incident carries with it a myriad of circumstances that must be accounted for and considered. Hopefully the "balanced and unbiased" IRB rulings will reflect that...

By Gongshow, at June 29, 2009 9:23 pm
the top 14 begins on the 14 august ,so it's like parisse didn't do anything...the punishment should begins at the debut of the season and the players will understand the lesson.

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 9:58 pm
Fair punishment for parisse, unfair for Burger, he should have got WAY more.

By JJM, at June 29, 2009 10:07 pm
Yeah whenever I see pros getting "dirty" and playing gritty or whatever you may call it, I feel a bit of shame inside. I feel a lot more embarassed when playing games myself, i'm a girl yes but that actually makes it worse. Players complaining at EVERYTHING, and I'm a scrumhalf so I guess I should get used to getting schtick.. but still. There's a difference. Getting yelled (for no reason, i hate foul play and follow rules to the T) "PUT THE FUCKING BALL IN STRAIGHT!!!" by a player at least 10 years older than me isn't exactly making me respect the player. I never fight back or yell back because that just disrupts and completely violates what rugby stands for. Unity, fair play. How are we supposed to convince the olympic commitee to bring in 7's when they can see what's happening in 15 a'side games. Not technically the same game but I have seen it happen, fights etc during 7's.. I just find it so stupid. I love rugby but jesus.. eye gouging, and yeah I love Burger he's one of a kind but whenever people mess around I find that stupid. Even seeing O'Driscoll at the second test against the boks now in the lions tour shoving around made me feel a little sadness.. i've always felt this way and always will!

By Universal Back, at June 29, 2009 10:09 pm
"the top 14 begins on the 14 august ,so it's like parisse didn't do anything...the punishment should begins at the debut of the season and the players will understand the lesson."

Read the news!! His ban starts at the beginning of the season!!! Eejit!

By Anonymous, at June 29, 2009 10:46 pm
stupid offence. when did the irb get so relaxed on these things?

By martin-offload, at June 29, 2009 11:33 pm
Its a sick act!! Don't just ban them, fine them as well! Hit them where it hurts!

By Unknown, at June 29, 2009 11:48 pm
12 weeks at least, it looked clearly intentional to me.
Oh and by the way, this isn't creeping into our game, it's always been there. If anything, there's less of it now.

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2009 12:04 am
These fools are spoiling the name of the sport we love.

An 8 week suspension for trying to blind someone is absolutely ridiculous...

By Ed, at June 30, 2009 12:20 am
There was absolutely nothing in that. I understand the need for citing, but it was clear the player grabbed hold, realized where his hand was and removed it pretty quickly thereafter. This is more of a case against New Zealand commentators who are among the most biased and ungraceful in the sport. NZ commentaries are quick to dismiss any misgivings of a NZ player and quick to call for a firing squad if anyone touches a NZ player roughly. Disgraceful commentators they should be cited for making all New Zealanders look soft.

By Patrick, at June 30, 2009 12:50 am
This needs to be removed from the game. I like the idea of a 1 year ban and removal of all rugby related incomes and a life time ban for any repeats

By MeAgain, at June 30, 2009 1:09 am
eye gouging is something you would see in football, rugby is literally legalised violoence, why cant players smash the hell out of each other rather than get all sneidy and shallow as to try and gouge another players eyes. the irb needs to get a grip and make a punishment like missing the next big tournament i.e 6 nations, tri nations or world cup because proffesionals shouldnt need a 2nds chance it shouldnt be done in the first place.

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2009 2:17 am
Wessel said, "Burger is a very uncoordinated bull in a china shop. He's an octopus with no motor functions. Which is why he cant pass or catch."

I must respectfully disagree with you.

At the high (test, pro) levels, recklesness it not excused. Players are expected to be in control of their bodies.

It is like a drunk driver hitting a kid asking for forgiveness.

While perhaps there was no malice in the direct action, the recklessness is so great, it cannot be excused.

Pardon the hyperbole. But the point is that Burger suffers from chronic recklessness. His recklessness at the expense of any regard for his opponents? At some point that approaches malice.

8 weeks is nothing to sniff at. However, I think the difference between Parisse and Burger:
1. Parisse will unlikely never show up again for a multi-game suspension
2. Burger will show up again on a citing. I would also imagine again that the ZA press and rugby politburo will attempt to deflect any accountability from the man.

By cheyanqui, at June 30, 2009 2:22 am
Thank God he's no longer Argentinian anymore, he is a stupid!. He should be banned for a year.

By Tiessi, at June 30, 2009 2:37 am
He's not gouging, that's obvious he's trying to get the ref attention (the guy is gouging and speaking to the ref together???)

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2009 3:00 am
HOLY SHIT! i cant believe people are saying this is worse than Burgers?! are you for real?! Parisse was stupid but it didnt look as if he was going for the eyes, more trying to grab his face.....but i agree that he made some (not much) contact with the eyes so he should be banned for a perioud of time! but burgers offence lasted for a far longer period of time and looked alot worse!

to me it looked as if parisse was trying to get the officials eyes, honestly, you wouldnt say "hey ref" then grab someones eyes intentionally would you?!

i think the ban is fair, he got his eyes intentional or not! but this is no way worse than burgers!

By No.7, at June 30, 2009 3:07 am
it's clear that burger has been treated like a star in his own country whereas parisse has been shown the full force of the law against the offence..parisse's ban(the minimum) is correct..burger's ban is a disgrace as it is the highest end(the digits two and four into the skull)..
i understand that 'colonial' fervour brings an added temperature to the blood but this stuff will kill the game more than any elv..
when kevin and tana committed the worst spear tackle of all time and went unpunished, that opened up the door for this shit..
tip rugby will become the dominant code if some of us men don't step up to take the ref job off these pussies...one year of elv's on top of approx 3 years of shit reffing is gonna ruin everything...including southern dominance over northern doggedness; and tries over tactics..
think about it

By wolonel, at June 30, 2009 3:30 am
OH I see, so if a NH player does it, that's fine, but if one of those dirty, cheating boks does it, he should be hung from the nearest yardarm.
Makes sense.
After all, the Boks have the presumption to beat the Lions. How dare they!

By jon, at June 30, 2009 4:10 am
Jon you tool, its obvious burgers gouge was worse why do you bring nh sh into it!!! and im a new zealander and proud ab supporter!!!

By AB's win next world cup!!!, at June 30, 2009 4:34 am
I dont get when the ban can last 12 weeks why Burger and Parisse only got 8!!!

more so with Burger....it was clear into Fitz's eyes and was seen by a touch judge and on 2 or 3 camera's!!

Parisse just looks like he was pushing Ross's face and caught him accicdetnly in the eye!!

im not condoning eye-gouging in any way but ive seen it happen (even to me) were a player in a ruck accicdently grabs a lad face and just pushes it!!

a finger may go over the eye socket but no intent to gouge at all!!

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2009 5:53 am
!Has Burger always been a dirty player? Often stupid yes. Reckless yes. But I was rather surprised that he did such a dastardly act.

Can't remember him ever throwing a punch, tripping or lifting and dropping a player. Which is weird. Why do it now?!

He's served a suspension every season for the last three years, high tackles, abusing the Referee and now gouging.

sorry, but he has a bad record for discipline.

great player - hot head.

As for Parisse I'm as disgusted at him as i am at Burger.

Both should be serving 6 months minimum, and i'd recommend a year.

Maybe the outrage over these sentences will maybe see the right ones being dished out in future?

Now the IRB need to deal with PDV.

By goodNumber10, at June 30, 2009 7:03 am
whats the deal with the nz commentators and their apparently pathetic knowledge of french and italian rugby player names and who they are

By jack, at June 30, 2009 7:08 am
To me it looks as if this was deliberate. If I'm going to grab a guys face, I'll reach around and grab his FACE, which includes his nose, cheeks etc.. basically cover his face. What Parisse did looks as though he deliberately even bent his finger, and aimed it perfectly so it didnt go all the way around, but landed on Ross' eye. He then pulled away as he did it.. in a eye 'poke'/gouge motion.

Maybe I'm just too 'non-british/irish' to see that this is worse than Burgers..

By Dave, at June 30, 2009 9:04 am
Punish harder please..

btw. not something I wouldve expected parisse to do btw.. this sort of foul play

By Cheis, at June 30, 2009 9:28 am
"Pardon the hyperbole. But the point is that Burger suffers from chronic recklessness. His recklessness at the expense of any regard for his opponents? At some point that approaches malice."

Well as somebody said on a NZ board, Burger does not even care for his own body, it safe to say it does not extend to opponents either.

I think the Burger incident should be punished heavily based on recklessness but the bias of some of the commentors on here is unbelievable. For example:

"Anonymous Gongshow said...

I can't believe that he was initially given 12 weeks, when Burger was initially only given 8 on an incident that was much more obvious and intentional."

On what basis does the Burger incident seem both more *obvious* an *intentional* - besides your prejudice that is?

By Wessel, at June 30, 2009 10:14 am
even though as a back-row with my club i do look up to the likes of parisse...has not won a game with Italy for over a year but still trudges on as argubally the best captain and number 8 in the world!!

but as far as gouging goes....its just disgraceful!!

it puts a bad name on are sport and its things like this or the Burger incident that puts a bad name on rugby as being a "holligans" sport!!

this should not be an 8 week ban but more like a 4 or 5 month ban!!

this should not be tolerated in any sport!!

you wouldnt even find holligans on the street gouging each other!!!

i know sometimes things on the pitch might go abit bad and (like Parisse) if you have not won a match in a while you might get a bit narky but tbh i would prefer to leave the pitch with a black eye than have someones fingers wedged into them!!

things like this should be a big ban and a hefty fine!!

mabye then we might get rugger into the olmypics again!!

By creggsrugby08, at June 30, 2009 11:50 am
Being a massive Italy fan Im dissapointed to see this from Parisse. Hes threatening to ruin his reputation. Did anyone know that hes never had a yellow or red card in all of his 67 test matches for Italy?! To be honest it looks as if parisse is gouging the guys face more than his eye...

By rugbyazzuri, at June 30, 2009 12:28 pm
I'm surprised more hasn't been made about the New Zealand commentators complete lack of rugby knowledge....

I mean Parisse is one of the best players in the world and he is referrer to hear as "someone"...And his face is in clear view so there's no excuse....this lack of knowledge was also very prevelant in the french games too.....

By themull, at June 30, 2009 12:35 pm
I agree with giving him an 8 week ban, but Burger should have been given far more . . Fitzy was obviously in pain and had to try and push Burger off!

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2009 12:38 pm
The New Zealand commentator makes me laugh, not Murray Mexted or Ian Smith who are highly respected experts of the game and very knowledgable, but the main commentator (don't know his name).
In the French games he got 'mixed up' between Clerc and Heymans, Trinh-Duc and Traille, and Ouedrago and Dusatoir, pronounced Dupuy as 'doo-poy', just a shambles.
And in the Italy game he only knew the Aussie-born Italians!! Compare him to the SA commentator Hugh Bladen and our british commentators (eddie butler, andrew cotter) and we must feel very lucky!

P.S. For Parisse 8 weeks is about right. For Burger, he should of had the full 24 weeks. Can't they increase the ban?

Sean, England

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2009 12:56 pm
Some really pathetic comments on here.

"its not deliberate and is just trying to grab his face"

Just admit it you hypocritical NH apologists, if that had been Ross "just trying to grab" Parisse's face you would have been screaming.

Both Parisse and Burger should have been banned for far longer.

By RememberTheMer, at June 30, 2009 2:30 pm
and another thing, I wish these ignorant kiwi commentators would actually have the decency to know the names of the players in foreign teams. parisse is not 'someone', hes one of the best no8's in the world.

By rugbyazzuri, at June 30, 2009 3:25 pm
From looking at the video it seems to me that Parisse is tired of the kiwi being offside in the maul and therefore grabs his face and what not a lil gauge just to pinpoint at the ref what's going on...
Had the ref made a call... different story.
I just can relate to being annoyed at a player doing something illegal and yet the ref not whistling anything (stomping on someone not trying to get out of a tackle is the most often thing I see.)
And yet taking justice into your own hands is not the best of answer.

finally I just tend to think that you're better off not being french when to it comes to being cited, as the IRB has never been very objective depending on your nationality...

By jay, at June 30, 2009 3:44 pm
i don't think that it was an intencionall offense, and he didn't cause any damage in the player. it was an unfair desition to such a correct player like Parisse

By Juan, at June 30, 2009 5:21 pm
Good acting by that AB player! The man is soooo overreacting, as if he had the eye absolutely destroyed! Footballer!

By Anonymous, at June 30, 2009 6:34 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NYONDg4J_E

I Can't believe you lot tried to say that this wasn't obvious or there wasn't a good enough camera angle - check it out!! You couldn't get a better view!! How clear do you want it?!

By RichW, at June 30, 2009 10:02 pm
Ah not Parrisse !!!! I can imagine dopes like Quinlan and Burger doing that but not him. I'm so disappointed in a player of such talent doing something so vile.

Also anyone saying that the footage of Burger gouging Fitzgerald is inconclusive should get their head checked out

By Third Centre, at June 30, 2009 10:21 pm
Also, Kiwi Commentators get your act together. Thats an embarrassment to a country of such massive rugby fans

By Third Centre, at June 30, 2009 10:24 pm
Jay......i think you mean stomping on someone who is not getting out of the way of a ruck...and also even though the name perhaps could suggest, Parisse is not french.....

And as for the old chesnut of "oh yeh just because its a NH player all you guys say it wasnt as bad as burgers"....are you guys blind, who gives a shit where they are from, its bloody clear as day to see, i couldnt give a rats ass what part of the world he's from, as far as im concerned i appreciate good rugby whatever the nation, and cheating rugby id like to see stamped out, as much as i do enjoy watching a punch up!

By No.7, at June 30, 2009 11:09 pm
How in God's name did Parisse get the same ban as Burger? He barely touched his eye, it was almost like a poke or something, whereas Burger clearly had his fingers dug into Fitzgerald's eyes. I'm not saying he shouldn't have gotten a ban, I just think Burger's should have been far longer.

By Kearney for tests, at July 01, 2009 12:28 am
Parisse contradicts de Villiers' hypothesis that balet and rugby don't mix. He lives in the 16th Arrondissement in Paris, surrounded by rich old women with poodles and he is hard as nails with brilliant ball skills.

I reckon he wanted a 12 week holiday and didn't take a shine to the kiwi lock so placed his holiday request in the guy's eyeball socket. Seriously, look at his face. That is not the look of a psychopath; it is the look of a man dreaming of the beach. He's clearly smiling because this was a premeditated incident he had planned in bed with his girlfriend who is possibly the hottest woman alive.

By Disco, at July 01, 2009 1:09 am
Disgraceful

By Disco, at July 01, 2009 1:12 am
Parisse is talking to the referee, anyone who thinks he intentionally wanted to gouge while talking to an official is nuts.

By Anonymous, at July 01, 2009 2:07 am
Where were all the Kiwi complaints when Kevin Mealamu/Tana Umaga were piledriving BOD neck-first into the ground?

This is nothing, he didn't even mean to do it.

By Anonymous, at July 01, 2009 2:10 am
Debatable.
His hand shpouldn't have been anywhere near his face. End of story.
Eye gouging is eye gouging.
Minimum punishment under the rules is 12 weeks.
Both Parisse and Burger should have got at least 12 weeks.
No double standards.
The only thing I would say is Bruger should prbably have got about 18 weeks, while Parrise mnaybe just 12.

By jon, at July 01, 2009 5:23 am
RichW, you're deluded. As is Stuart Barnes, who's clearly influenced you and every other Brit/Irish who saw the Sky feed.

Yes, you can see his hands near his eyes.. but you CAN NOT see his fingers 'working his eyes'. It's simply too far away, so we all presume..

Whereas with Quinlan & Parisse, it's clear cut and highly visible

By Dave, at July 01, 2009 9:42 am
'..Burger clearly had his fingers dug into Fitzgerald's eyes..'

Oh my word.. now I've heard it all.
Far too many emotional judgements of this incident imo.

By Dave, at July 01, 2009 9:44 am
Point is, he MIGHT have done that, yes. But he MIGHT also have just had his fingers applying pressure to Fitzgeralds face.. resulting in 'contact with the eye area'.

We simply cant see well enough. And iirc, Leo Cullen had pretty visible marks on his face after the match when Quinlan worked him over. Fitzgerald still looked his pretty boy self.

As an aside though, it is interesting (and scary) how differently people can view an incident when they have an emotional connection to it. Changes ones perception completely.

By Dave, at July 01, 2009 9:47 am
why dont refs just dish out red cards evry time this sort of thing happens, surely it wouldnt happen as much then?

By Anonymous, at July 01, 2009 11:28 am
Dave - the video is as clear as day. Do you want to see his fingers knuckle deep in his eye socket?! People with opinons like you give the game a bad rep - PDV case in point!!

By RichW, at July 01, 2009 11:34 am
No, it isnt clear as day that his fingers are INSIDE the eye/s. I never denied contact with the eye area.

By Dave, at July 01, 2009 11:44 am
Somebody above posted this video of the Burger 'gouging'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NYONDg4J_E

I watched it again and again and again and I still don't see clearly that his finger are inside the eyes.

They do look like they are in his face and could be in the eye area. Thats about as much as I can see.

Are BIL supporters blessed with superior eyes?

Having said that, I think any (even unintentional) gripping on the face area should be a red cardable offense.

Leave nothing open to interpretation and prejudice.

By Wessel, at July 01, 2009 4:02 pm
@no.7 : never said Parisse was french even though he plays for SF.
And yes I guess my english is slowly decading :P

I was just making a general statement on the IRB... ^^

By jay, at July 02, 2009 10:59 am
My point exactly Wessel. I was starting to wonder if maybe there were closeups and other angles that actually existed that I missed out on for some reason.

The mind sees what it wants to believe in this case, and that is that Burger was tickling the back of the inside of Fitzgeralds skull.

If that were the case, he would have been injured, left the field, etc etc. He was absolutely fine.

If the recommended action is 8 to 12 weeks, then thats fine. I dont think he deserves any more than that. Unless of course the IRB change the rulings, in which case sure, give him longer.

By Dave, at July 02, 2009 11:28 am
Dave :

"Point is, he MIGHT have done that, yes. But he MIGHT also have just had his fingers applying pressure to Fitzgeralds face.. resulting in 'contact with the eye area'.

We simply cant see well enough. And iirc, Leo Cullen had pretty visible marks on his face after the match when Quinlan worked him over. Fitzgerald still looked his pretty boy self..."

Hmmm..."He might also just have had his fingers applying pressure to Fitzgerald's face...resulting in contact to the eye area"...

Is it necessary for someone to receive a serious eye injury due to somebody 'applying pressure to x's face resulting in contact to the eye area' before the IRB act to stamp out this kind of foul play by way of increasing the minimum period of suspension significantly. Because that's what it is. Foul.

That's what your second paragraph above says - bizarre comments about Fitzgerald's 'pretty boy self' aside...

By Eoghan, at July 02, 2009 12:11 pm
You lost me.

I never said he wasnt guilty, I just dont think any of us can judge the degree to which he's guilty, based on the footage.

By Dave, at July 02, 2009 1:47 pm
nothing like as malicious as Burger's idiotic gouge, right in front of the ref.

But still eye gouging, and unacceptable..

By David, at July 03, 2009 8:24 am
It's the same, doesn't matter where it happens.
12 weeks, both players should have got at least 12 weeks.
That's the rule, the IRB just need the cojons to enforce it.

By Anonymous, at July 04, 2009 9:18 am
am i the only one who thinks this isnt really a gouge? he seems to just raise his hand to the face of the AB player and his finger makes light contact... he can't really see what hes doing and the AB players response doesn't look 100% authentic.....

By Anonymous, at July 04, 2009 3:37 pm
I love Schalk Burger but what he did was stupid, dangerous and needs to be stamped out of rugby now and he got his punishment whether you think it's fair or not. The lions were not angels during the game either but because they lost the series 2-0 they have latched themselves on this one incident to explain their loss in my opinion. It was not Schalk who lost the game for them it was ROG! But all this Parisse's was not as bad as Burgers NONSENSE has to stop, eye gouging is UNACCEPTABLE PERIOD. Contact with the eyes of an opponent is not part of the game for a reason, whether it looked accidental or not they the players themselves made the choice go for the eye area. Both players deserved the bans they got and they are probably feeling stupid/ashamed as they should.

By Anonymous, at July 04, 2009 3:50 pm
They really need to clarify things with regards to a standard punishment for this sort of thing. At the start of the season Neil Best was given an 18 week ban for what the committee described as accidental eye gouging, when before the sentence was handed out most people thought he would get a maximum of no more than 4 weeks.
By the end of the season Burger gets 8 weeks for something much more deliberate and vicious, which is the same as Sergio gets for a much milder offence.
All eye gouging should have a minimum 10 week ban, going up to a maximum of 1 year for the worst, and the IRB shouldnt be lenient about it either.
And anyway, it sends out the wrong message if we're given out lesser sentences for the same offence as time goes by, when we should be increasing them.

By Sean, at July 05, 2009 12:31 pm