Manu Tuilagi smashes Tom Williams

Top14 player imposter!

JDV smashed by Benoit August

The Northampton Saints 30m scrum!

Bastareaud huge hit on Rory Lamont

All Blacks skills - Pt 2 In the backyard

Trinh-Duc sets up Harinordoquy try

Wales vs England 1999

Greg Holmes great hit on Francois Louw

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Jerome Schuster cited for headbutt against Munster

As suspected, Perpignan prop Jerome Schuster has been cited for what looks to be a headbutt on Munster flanker Denis Leamy during their recent Heineken Cup match at the Stade Aime Giral.

Schuster was yellow carded upon the recommendation of the assistant referee, who was a few metres away as Schuster was pulled to the ground by Leamy. He then overreacted by driving into him with his head.

He will face a disciplinary hearing on January 13, specifically for ‘striking with the head’, which is in contravention of the Law 10.4 (a) - A player must not strike an opponent with the fist or arm, including the elbow, shoulder, head or knee(s).

If found guilty, the shortest possible ban Schuster will receive is four weeks.

The middle of the range sanction for striking with the head is 8 weeks, while top-end offences carry a punishment of anything from 12 weeks and up. The maximum a player can receive is 2 years.

If Schuster does get suspended, he will miss Perpignan’s last two pool games against Northampton and Bennetton Treviso. It might not bother them too much though, as they’re already out of contention in Pool 1, following two losses to Munster, and one to Treviso.

With all the evidence laid before you, would you ban him, and if yes, for how long?

Time: 0:42



  • Silly, although I can't say I've never seen that type of thing before.. (with the player getting away with it)

    I personally think the yellow card is enough, but wouldn't have complained about a red. Anything more is maybe a bit much, imo.

    By Anonymous Scotsdale, at December 23, 2009 5:33 pm  

  • Lifetime ban if he's french, a week ban if not...
    How is that different to our dupuy gouging... no clue.
    Go on the IRB you are all so fair...Joan of Arc ain't dead... lez find her in every french that plays rugby.

    Sry for the bugging I'm just tired of seeing totally different judgments depending on...

    By Blogger jay, at December 23, 2009 5:41 pm  

  • is it just me or does the munster no2 do exactly the same thing back at the end of the clip

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 5:41 pm  

  • ^ I was wondering the same thing actually!

    By Anonymous Scotsdale, at December 23, 2009 5:44 pm  

  • I can't really tell if that was an intentional headbutt or not. Definitely clumsy though. I think the yellow is sufficient. If he gets banned I hope it's not for long because that was pretty weak. And yeah it sure looked like the Munster number 2 did the same but I think he was just trying to clear him out.

    By Blogger Chris, at December 23, 2009 5:53 pm  

  • No number 2 thought it was a ruck and unfortunately made contact head to head, whereas the silly frenchman aimed for the head...big difference...well at least that's the official version we'll get from our irb lads.
    French man : vicious
    Irish man : unlucky ruck head to head.

    By Blogger jay, at December 23, 2009 5:56 pm  

  • nah guys munster hooker is trying to clear him of his team mate,
    no problem there

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 5:57 pm  

  • quite funny to see his frustration of being outrucked

    By Anonymous Munstermun, at December 23, 2009 6:10 pm  

  • Anonymous said...
    nah guys munster hooker is trying to clear him of his team mate,
    no problem there

    pitty he is no where near the ruck or ball

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 6:44 pm  

  • Jay you are an absolute idiot. Jennings got banned for 12 weeks for that incident which you metioned. Dupuy gouged Ferris twice, while holding Ferris' head down to get a good angle to gouge from. How are they at all similar you muppet? I really don't know why you're trying to defend these assholes who gouge people and headbutt them.

    By Anonymous Kearney for tests, at December 23, 2009 6:49 pm  

  • Jay, difference is, Dupuy did it twice so he gets double the ban.

    By Anonymous Richie, at December 23, 2009 7:25 pm  

  • Kearney... I won't even bother getting as low as you in your insults (illeterate would be appropriate)
    Now tell where am I defending them ?
    Where did you read from me Dupuy hasn't done anything ?
    Take a breath, learn to read and maybe you'll finally understand that my problem, all tool and muppet that I am, is only the difference in IRB's judgments.(wow I even did the work for you...reading is FUNdamental) Had it been once or twice, np, but it's been going on for ages.
    So surely now you're gonna tell me how the gouging was different, how one had long nails while the other tried to punch and unfortunately his thumb got stuck for a good 2sec... or that my english is so bad that I should stick to French ?

    Then again kinda quickly sums the objectivity in you... just like the IRB does...

    By Blogger jay, at December 23, 2009 7:29 pm  

  • he deserved the yellow card and thats it. He shouldnt get a ban.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 7:42 pm  

  • Jay, I think you'll find it's a clamp down on dirty play in general, not a vendetta against French players. It's just been a coincidence that the latest citings/suspensions have been against French players, but believe me, other countries get their chances in the spotlight too.

    Put it this way, if Heaslip was found guilty of an eyegouge and Tommy Bowe got suspended for his spear tackle, that would follow on from Jennings & Quinlan being suspended for eyegouging, and suddenly the Irish would look filthy all at once. It's coincidence mate.

    Everyone has their incident over time, so I honestly don't think anyone is out to get the French.

    That said, if a player does something stupid, nomatter where he's from, he deserves to be punished. Schuster lost the plot here, and will probably be suspended, rightly so.

    By Anonymous FrankyH, at December 23, 2009 7:42 pm  

  • anyone else thing burger should have got at least 6 months as well?? in response to the duprey comments.

    Doesn't matter what nationality this player is, his reaction is completley stupid and i wouldn't mind seeing him get banned for a few weeks..

    By Anonymous Tom, at December 23, 2009 7:44 pm  

  • Settle down, Jay. I really doubt you'll find many fans of the citing commissioners or Jeff Blackett here.

    Most of the time, the citing commissioners are like vice cops and make big deals of nothing at all (eg - this very incident), but for obvious reasons, they are necessary.

    They're surprisingly transparent with their judiciary process, though there is always room for a better explanation - one you could only expect to get if you were actually attending the disciplinary hearing...

    But in any case, they make their decisions available online:


    On the punishments for various offenses:


    I'm pretty sure it's understood why a French fan should be frustrated with the string of citings of French players - it all seems a little unfair, sometimes. High tackles, dangerous play, etc. happen many times every game and recently, more French players than non- have been getting in trouble. It could point to a prediliction for the citing commissioners to cite the French, or it could be a coincidence (eg - teams that are losing a game will be more desperate and frustrated and can commit more offenses)...either way...not a lot one can do but be mad, I guess.

    By Anonymous Javier, at December 23, 2009 7:53 pm  

  • On a side note - I'm sorry to bring this up since it's unrelated to Schuster - I think that it's pretty wrong of the IRB to suspend David Attoub if they're not ruling whether he's guilty or not until January.

    It's a bit like detaining a prisoner without formally charging him...pretty shitty thing to do. But, I guess he's a 'replacement prop' anyways, so hopefully Stade don't miss him too much.


    Anyways, again, about Jerome Schuster: surely a penalty, reasonbly worth a yellow, doubtfully worth a red, definitely not worth a ban. As someone else said, it's not too much different from what Fogarty does immediately after. He was an idiot, so he cost his team 3 points. I'd have to go watch the game again, but I'm sure if Munster went for points, ROG managed to get the 3.

    By Anonymous Javier, at December 23, 2009 8:00 pm  

  • he does it twice = twice the ban ?
    See if tomorrow you stab someone if you get judged twice...
    FrankyH : I won't ever justify the french dirty plays. The first times I got eye gouged were... by some french players overseas (outside of France)... We do have a culture around dirty playing.

    I think a difference, is while a punch, a bite, a gouge is all dirty play to us on somewhat the same level, "you" (lez keep it to the UK) have a defined hierarchy for those acts.

    Again I can't justify the recent bans, they deserve them. But now if you look at the last 30 years, our whole culture has been about unfairness as for IRB's judgments.
    Not that we are not guilty...we are, in lot of cases but rather getting meaner sanctions has been our everyday food.
    A lot of pros and ex-pros talk about it here, ask french rugby fans and I end up thinking that we could shout all we want, the language the culture... makes it that we'll never be heard...
    The biggest example I had for this was Serge Betsen's ban.

    By Blogger jay, at December 23, 2009 8:03 pm  

  • fancy having him headbutt you!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 8:18 pm  

  • Does anyone else enjoy the irony of someone calling someone else 'illiterate' whilst spelling it incorrectly?

    "I won't even bother getting as low as you in your insults (illeterate would be appropriate)"


    By Blogger jmark, at December 23, 2009 8:43 pm  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 9:06 pm  

  • Wouldnt mind if Schuster headbutted Leamy if Leamy had done something to him first but to react like that after being legally cleared legally out of a ruck is stupid.... If he wants to act like that hes playin the wrong sport!!!

    By Anonymous O'Connell for president, at December 23, 2009 9:11 pm  

  • "Legally..."
    When you're clearly tackled (not shoved or pushed backward, TACKLED) while you're standing in your own side, can you consider this LEGAL? When, in the game, do you legally tackle someone with no ball? (no understatement here)

    The headbutt is stupid, so the penalty is deserved, the yellow too since a headbutt has nothing to do in the game (but he shouldn't be the only one to get a card) and a ban is too much.
    The funniest thing is, if all the headbutters are banned, there won't be any props or hookers left to play! (before anyone throws a tantrum in here, i'm not talking about the meanness of these players -that would be ridiculous- but about the "engage" scrum order)

    By Anonymous Maximus, at December 23, 2009 9:39 pm  

  • Omg rugby is really beginning gay :/

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 9:41 pm  

  • Frenchmen must learn to act clerverly. On a ruck, if I understood well, it is allowed to enter head first.
    I will put a couple of posts on French clubs blogs, asking to enter head first into rucks, against Irish provinces. Of course, my preference goes to head to head chock, of course. No yellow card possible, unless that the fact they are French make a difference.
    We'll see that soon.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 10:18 pm  

  • By the way, Chuster has not been cleared legally from the ruck as he was not part of the ruck yet.
    The board should quickly ref=define what a "ruck" is, as I understand that the simple idea of it is different from one ref to the other.
    Chuster is not clever anyway, deserves a 8 or 12 weeks sanction. He could easily wait the next ruck to clear legally with a glasgow kiss the ugly Munster 8 !
    Everyone would have found that normal.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 10:22 pm  

  • Sorry, but here comes a serious comment. I think a ruling panel would weight the ban towards the intent and not the outcome ... so although Schuster's aim was lousy and the impact softened by Leamy's head-guard, his head was down and he meant harm. In my view it's as bad as gouging - 6 months.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 10:27 pm  

  • boooh again a nasty vicious french who attack cowardly an irish angel. a classic one: the irish does the foul, the french overreacts, silly yes, nasty no...

    well let see what erc will invent to punish him.
    Like 80% of people here, i think the yellow is sufficient because the contact is soft. But i think he will take a 1 year ban because aiming french is so cool.

    quite paranoid but so realist..

    ps: is there a partnership between sky and erc :) ?

    By Anonymous Flooz, at December 23, 2009 10:56 pm  

  • if he is to be banned, it shud only be something like 2 weeks, thats it !

    By Anonymous luxi, at December 23, 2009 10:57 pm  

  • PS: Highlights of Biarritz vs newport show the "real" face of what true rugby is.
    but i know it will interest nobody...

    guillotine some frogs is more exciting

    By Anonymous Flooz, at December 23, 2009 10:59 pm  

  • as bad as gouging!! Your entitled to your opinion but you must be having a laugh! How is something that is less powerfull than a punch be worse than putting you fingers into someones eyes possible blinding them or doing other serious damage?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 23, 2009 11:05 pm  

  • sorry to everyone for my rant at jay.

    On the actual video, ofcourse the irish 8 is no saint, but thats what it is about in some games, wind someone up until they lose it.....then you can walk away...

    clearly schuster lost it and reacted badly, like i said above i dont particularly think much should be made of it, perhaps a week or so ban, (at the most). as scotsdale said, maybe it should have been a red and then end of the story, i thought headbutts were supposed to be an automatic red, perhaps if it had been a red there wouldnt have been a citing as it was dealt with there and then....

    By Anonymous No.7, at December 23, 2009 11:14 pm  

  • Jmark got there ahead of me.

    Flooz, all French home HCup games are produced by French tv companies, Sky use these, then probably bring some of their own cameras in.

    Yellow, should've been enough, but jumping at Leamy doesn't help.

    By Anonymous Huh!! the 3rd, at December 24, 2009 12:08 am  

  • @Tom why would you bring up the Schalk Burger thing again. He wasnt found guilty of eye gouging (I know that doesnt mean he didnt do it) He was only found guilty of making contact with the face. What is a sufficient punishment in your opinion? Its people like you that would like to see rugby union turned into touch rugby. Do us all a favour and go and watch football and never coment on a rugby site again.

    Jay I feel your pain but this type of thing should be punished. Dont think the IRB is fair at all, but they are sovereign and favour the All Blacks and a few other teams. As can be seen in their sellection of IRB player of the year. This is porpably cause the All Blacks represcent their view of what rugby should look like and they never play dirty or ever have played dirty. Please remeber this is a team that capped a champion
    boxer Kevin Skinner to sort out the springbok props.

    By Anonymous DontMentiontheWCinNZ, at December 24, 2009 12:52 am  

  • Anonymous 4 posts above, how can you say a headbutt is weaker than a punch!? a headbutt is far more powerful than a punch, it's only Schuster's weak contact that stops it really damaging leamy. From an australian.

    By Anonymous AUS99, at December 24, 2009 4:22 am  

  • Anonymous who reckons that a headbutt to the temple is 'less powerfull than a punch' - you may want to read my comment before replying to it. I said a headbut is as serious as gouging beacuse both have high potential of permanent eye or brain injury.

    If someone swings a sledge hammer at you but is a lousy aim and happens to hit you on a steel boot toe ... card or ban?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 24, 2009 9:33 am  

  • @jmark : Thanks and yes, illiterate is better... mind me spelling analphabète ? :P
    Kinda sums the thing up, an irish man insults a french man and the reaction is hot blooded and stupid ;P

    @number 7 :didn't get your ranting...
    @Javier : gracias por el info

    A headbutt is serious business, a yellow and 2 or 4 weeks is ok imo...The intent is clearly there no matter what.
    Will number 2 get anything ? I highly doubt it...

    By Blogger jay, at December 24, 2009 10:09 am  

  • Every country in the world thinks that the IRB rule against them overly harshly: The North think that the South has the IRB in thier pocket - Richie McCaw wins IRB player of the year. The South African's think that the IRB picks them out - Botha, justice incident. The South think the North dominate the IRB - decision against rule changes. The Islanders think that there is racism in the IRB's treatement of the tackle area and now the French think that the IRB have a vendetta against them.

    Every ref is also biased...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 24, 2009 10:32 am  

  • zidane would'va knocked him out. cold.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 24, 2009 11:04 am  

  • Not totally convinced. Yellow card was fine, it was some unnecessary off-the-ball aggro, but can't see the need for any sort of lengthy ban.

    It's one of those incidents which when you slow it right down, it looks worse than what it is. At full speed, seems more like he dives in spoiling for a fight rather than an attempt to butt Leamey. A George Robson moment it was not.

    By Anonymous Edbok, at December 24, 2009 11:06 am  

  • Jay, ill try not to rant this time as i assume it got deleted..

    I basically think you are a bit daft bringing up dupuy.

    Lets take his country of origin out of the equation, it was an awful gouge, put it back in, and guess what, its still an awful gouge.

    Burgers gouge(or whatever you call it) was not nearly as bad as dupuy's because for the simple fact dupuy went in for seconds...not to mention dupuy was looking at ferris and knew exactly what he was doing, whereas burger could argue he could see exactly what he was doing..... (sorry to bring this up)

    Then the fact dupuy looked around, before he went in again....

    Everything about it was so wrong and malicious, and calculated, i mean, heat of the moment for the first attempt...so what was the second attempt?

    I truly believe it is one of the worst things ive seen for a while on a pitch, and no doubt thats how the lot citing him felt. therefore to hopefully stamp out gouging they give him a big ban. If it was a player from a club team i support, or a home nation then id still say the same, i dont want to see that in the game and if huge bans get rid of it then so be it!!!

    Wait until the next gouge, if there is one, if its less that half of dupuys then i might say you have a bit of a case there, but as it stands dupuy getting a huge ban was totally fair!!!

    Like i said before i think this is a much lower end of the scale, and perhaps a red should have been issued and then no further action.

    perhaps because it was a yellow a ban should be in place but something small (in comparison), 1 week?

    By Anonymous No.7, at December 24, 2009 1:47 pm  

  • Thx for taking the time to answer.
    Worst thing recently ? for sure...

    The video I posted in comparison has some similarities to me :
    1 sec gouging, then a "rub to the face" once they're up... Kinda the other way around to what Dupuy has done.

    The big difference as you stated it is Dupuy acting through 5 sec looking up if the ref is here, while the Jennings incident is within 3 sec...2 men going at it.

    So now, would it be too much to agree that the intent and the consciousness of the act rather than the thing itself (Ferris could have played the next day... I mean no real arm done even though the intent is there) is what got him banned for so long ?

    If that's the case, np ...again don't think I'd like to see Dupuy playing anytime soon...
    I'm just wondering on the judgments, has it always been the case ? condemn the intent rather than the consequence of the actual act ?
    Hopefully, we'll have an example and can see for ourselves...
    Not that I crave those stupid behaviors.

    By Blogger jay, at December 24, 2009 3:13 pm  

  • Yellow is enough. Stop this stupid citing thing!

    By Anonymous Juggernauter, at December 24, 2009 4:07 pm  

  • I'm with you Juggernauter^^^! For almost any offense a card is enough. This citing commission is completely out of hand!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at December 24, 2009 4:51 pm  

  • In full speed, it just looks like he launches himself at Leamy to make his point about not playing players away from the ball, but in slo-mo you can see him cock his head. Low end of range - 4 weeks.

    By Anonymous JK, at December 24, 2009 4:56 pm  

  • .....hmmm jay you seemed to have calmed down a bit or something from your previous post because i think i agree with you.

    I think its more the intent that should be concentrated on rather than the outcome!

    You see spear tackles being dotted aroun and probably 99% of the time the guy is fine and there is no issue, but something has to be said!.....

    Anyway i gotta be off, i heard a bottle of bubbly open!


    gotta love what RD did with the banner at the top! lol

    By Anonymous No.7, at December 24, 2009 7:24 pm  

  • I wish the French people would stop crying every time one of their dirty players is punished. There is a serious problem with the culture of French rugby dirty play is considered normal. They need to learn that this is not accepted everywhere. I can understand that if all French clubs agree withing the French league to play dirty, and they will not complain because they all do it. But they must realise that when they play teams from the other countries (the vast majority) who consider gouging and biting and headbutting to have no place in the game, they will be punished.

    Of course it is all part of a big conspiracy...this is what the French media tells them, and of course they believe it. An Irish team goes to the home of the French champions and destroys them - quick! Think of an excuse! They cheated! The referee is unfair! The IRB hates us!

    Anything except, "we were not good enough". And if their players get banned for dirty play, they look for ANY example of someone getting a lower punishment, even if it is a totally different case...

    So boring. French paranoid posters, please take your conspiracy theories to the guys from the X-Files, and let the real rugby fans talk about the game. You are making yourselves look like foolish children in the eyes of the world.

    By Anonymous CauCau, at December 24, 2009 8:33 pm  

  • Juggernauter -

    Stop the stupid citing thing why? So that dirty French players get away with attacking players from other countries?

    Do you think there should be no punishment for Dupuy, or for Fingers Burger?

    Because with no citing, these players would not have been punished for their horrible actions.

    By Anonymous Mike, at December 24, 2009 8:36 pm  

  • Mike,

    I'm pretty sure he means the "stupid citing" as in the useless citings. Of course, it's necessary to have citing commissioners, but they don't have to turn every penalty/yellow card/red card into a citing.

    Dan Carter's "high tackle", Jerome Schuster's overreaction, Bakkies Botha's clearing out of Jones, Tommy Bowe's dangerous tackle...all of these were dumb reasons to cite someone. Penalties and cards, ok, but it's silly to have these seemingly once a week.

    By Anonymous Wigs, at December 24, 2009 9:33 pm  

  • Wigs -

    Agreed, if that is what he meant then he may have a point.

    By Anonymous Mike, at December 24, 2009 10:06 pm  

  • Citing is Ok when you're punishing a player that is deliberateley violating the rules of the sport or the implicit rules of sportsmanship, such as eye goughing, punches, explicit spear tackles, etc... but a high/off time tackle may be done in the heat of the game, and if the player admits his error and apologizes inmediately, that's perfectly fine. If you see malice in an action then it's ok to EVALUATE if the players needs forward "punishing" off the field. Yellow and red cards were created to show players ehat can't be tolerated in the pitch, and they should be used when there's no malice in the action. But starting to cite players for rampaging high tackles or a lost temper on a ruck is ruining our game and damaging the IRB

    By Anonymous Juggernauter, at December 25, 2009 12:15 am  

  • By the way, merry christmas! I hope the citing comission gets a big bag of coal from ol' Santa.

    By Anonymous Juggernauter, at December 25, 2009 12:18 am  

  • Yeh gotta agree, with these comments on citings....I think some foul play only and only deserves cards at the most.

    I think citing should only ever be used for serious issues or perhaps those which were missed by the referee.

    I think if a referee misses a bit of foul play then the citing commissioner should look at it, i think if it is worthy of a red in a game then perhaps a match ban, if its a yellow then just make a note of it....then say, 3 missed yellows card opportunities, or something then have a match ban.....I think if this happened then at least countries could stop whingeing over unpunished opposition!!!

    But really every now and again referee's get fed up of players and want them off the pitch and this appears to be an automatic citing....which s daft, i think Schuster shouldnt be banned but i imagine he might be, the referee dealt with the incident and imo it should stop just there!

    By Anonymous No.7, at December 25, 2009 9:32 am  

  • Hmmm...never thought these words would make sense in a sentence but :

    'that's not really a bad headbutt' lol

    The last angle shown is the worst one, the second view of it kind of shows him lurch into the Munster player and then lower his head...but it doesn't look like he went for the headbutt as an option, just that he ducked his head as he had a minor go at the Munster guy...

    Eh...I'd probably ban him for a game for recklessness. I don't see the need to make an example of it...I hate the citing bans that result from rigidly adhered to 'up with this we must not put' formulas - each incident is different in terms of intent and outcome.

    By Anonymous Eoghan, at December 27, 2009 2:51 pm  

  • To Eoghan,

    'each incident is different in terms of intent and outcome.'

    and players too, i.e. repeat offenders

    By Anonymous No.7, at December 29, 2009 12:39 am  

Please note: All comments are moderated and will be removed immediately if offensive.

Post a Comment

<< Home

Missed out on recent posts? View by monthly archive
July 2011 | June 2011 | May 2011 | April 2011 | March 2011 | February 2011


Ultimate Rugby Sevens | Frontup.co.uk | Whatsisrugby.com | RossSkeate.com | Fusebox | Olympic-rugby.org
The Rugby Blog | Blogspot rugby | Free Sports Video Guide | Lovell Rugby Blog | Lerugbynistere | Free Betting Offers

All videos featured are hosted externally and property of the respective video sharing platforms.
Rugbydump features and archives them in an effort to promote the game worldwide.
Copyright © 2010 Rugbydump