What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Burgess eye gouge

Messages
17,258
There are degrees of eye gouges, just as there are degrees of broken bones, hamstring strains or concussions.

Just because Robbie’s eye didn’t look like that doesn’t mean a gouge didn’t occur. His eye was pretty damn red, and there is video evidence of Burgess sticking his finger into his eye.


I propose a definitional meeting of minds as to the term gouge in the context of this incident.

I can accept that his eye was a tad reddened afterwards ( although no media has checked to see if his eye was red beforehand).

But I would argue that the redness was the natural result of a vanilla flavoured facial, that is caused by friction of his hand across his upper face region including the externalities of the surface of his eye socket.

The bold claim as to existence of footage into the eye itself, well I have not this in common media. I have seen images that suggest this only, but naught conclusive.

Unless it’s beyond a reasonable doubt, I can’t subscribe to this overbearing public outcry that embraces crude and destructive stereotypes.

On that basis, the possibility of a standard facial (albeit couched in obscene visual atmospherics) remains not only alive, but indeed, likely.
You're 58 ?

Have you always taken life this seriously ?

Relax a little.

Nah, I’m all good!!
 
Messages
17,258
I doubt a “vanilla flavoured facial” would redden the eye that much, if at all. You would need to do some serious rubbing of the eye to get that level of redness without any actual insertion.

If my eye gets itchy I will give it a rub. Probably harder than a vanilla-flavoured facial would be. My eye doesn’t turn out red like that unless I’m rubbing it regularly over a long period. A two-second long facial without a gouge wouldn’t do that.

There’s some shots of robbies post event eye I am trying to upload that illustrate a “soft” or “dull” redness but nothing like the effects of the gouge I posted earlier.

Even so, without some evidence that his eye was ok beforehand, the redness presents as basically circumstantial without the requisite causation. A photo of him prior to that might be of help to the prosecution.

I suppose your own experience is a valid one to offer in corroboration of the gouge, but I submit that only where you and Robbie shared a similar physiological status.

It’s not unreasonable to suggest that Robbie as a footballer has sustained previous facial/eye injuries, hence making his skin more prone and succeptible tothe effects of friction, enlivening the reddish colour faster and with more effect than a person who may not have had a similar career with similar injuries and so forth.

Thank you for your post.
 

T.S Quint

Coach
Messages
14,652
There’s some shots of robbies post event eye I am trying to upload that illustrate a “soft” or “dull” redness but nothing like the effects of the gouge I posted earlier.

Even so, without some evidence that his eye was ok beforehand, the redness presents as basically circumstantial without the requisite causation. A photo of him prior to that might be of help to the prosecution.

I suppose your own experience is a valid one to offer in corroboration of the gouge, but I submit that only where you and Robbie shared a similar physiological status.

It’s not unreasonable to suggest that Robbie as a footballer has sustained previous facial/eye injuries, hence making his skin more prone and succeptible tothe effects of friction, enlivening the reddish colour faster and with more effect than a person who may not have had a similar career with similar injuries and so forth.

Thank you for your post.

I’m of the opinion that what you have just said is rubbish.

Thanks for your post though.
 

Tiger5150

Bench
Messages
3,895
Remember that guy who used to post all those rambling threads and people just started responding with cooking recipes. Amadaca? I think he's back.

My moneys on Alien, or Bunniesman. The "Tigers fan" desperately defending a Souffs player, and general dribbling has Alien all over it
 
Messages
15,540
The following excerpt is from this article on NRL.com -

South Sydney prop George Burgess faces at least 10 matches on the sideline if found guilty of an alleged eye-gouge on Wests Tigers hooker Robbie Farah in Thursday night's clash at Bankwest Stadium.

Burgess has been referred to the judiciary without a grading on a dangerous contact charge (eye contact) and has 50 per cent loading from a previous eye-gouge ban over an incident involving New Zealand captain Dallin Watene-Zelezniak in England at the end of the last season.

With the base penalty for grade 3 dangerous contact being 500 demerit points, which equates to a five-match suspension, Burgess is facing a longer ban as the match review committee considers the incident to be of a higher grading than detailed in the NRL judiciary code.

As each grade is scaled up by 200 demerit points for dangerous contact charges, the base penalty for a grade 4 offence would be 700 demerit points and any penalty imposed on Burgess would include a 50 per cent loading for the incident in last year's Test which cost him a four-match ban.

The judiciary is free to determine a different grade to what the match review committee has recommended.

The England forward missed the third Test of the series against the Kiwis and the first three rounds of this year's Telstra Premiership.

It is understood Burgess apologised to Farah, a former Souths team-mate, immediately after the match on Thursday night, won 14-9 by the Tigers.

However, the match review committee considered it be more serious than the 2019 eye-gouge by Canberra forward Hudson Young on Canterbury prop Aiden Tolman, which resulted in a five-match suspension.

NRL.com has seen unreleased footage of the Young incident, which shows him digging his thumb into Tolman's eye, and the Raiders rookie pleaded guilty to a grade three dangerous contact charge and accepted a five-match ban after loading and carry-overs from previous offences were added.

Young would have been suspended for seven matches but he received a 25 per cent discount for an early plea – an option which will not be available to Burgess as his case has been referred directly to the tribunal.

Cowboys lock Josh McGuire has twice this season been fined for grade one contrary conduct after putting his hand in the face of opponents but there was insufficient video evidence to suggest either incident was an eye-gouge and warranted a more serious charge of dangerous contact.

The charge against Burgess follows signalling by the NRL this week of a tougher stance on incidents of foul play by referees and the match review committee.

The ARL Commission approved recommendations by the NRL Competition Committee for crusher tackles which are deemed reckless or intentional to be directly referred to the judiciary by the match review committee, without a grading.

In addition, players can be sin-binned or sent off for serious crusher tackles from round 15, which began on Thursday night.

The match review committee was also instructed to apply a higher grading for more serious late tackles – those deemed to be forceful and unnecessary – without being restricted by precedent.

There is a video in the article which shows the incident. The video has the heading under it of "No need to put himself in that position: Bennett on Burgess incident" and the actual footage of the incident is at about the 15 second mark.
 

unforgiven

Bench
Messages
3,138
The following excerpt is from this article on NRL.com -



There is a video in the article which shows the incident. The video has the heading under it of "No need to put himself in that position: Bennett on Burgess incident" and the actual footage of the incident is at about the 15 second mark.
That footage clearly shows the finger being pushed into Farah's eye! What do you think @The Silverdale Phantom ?
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
35,708
I propose a definitional meeting of minds as to the term gouge in the context of this incident.

I can accept that his eye was a tad reddened afterwards ( although no media has checked to see if his eye was red beforehand).

But I would argue that the redness was the natural result of a vanilla flavoured facial, that is caused by friction of his hand across his upper face region including the externalities of the surface of his eye socket.

The bold claim as to existence of footage into the eye itself, well I have not this in common media. I have seen images that suggest this only, but naught conclusive.

Unless it’s beyond a reasonable doubt, I can’t subscribe to this overbearing public outcry that embraces crude and destructive stereotypes.

On that basis, the possibility of a standard facial (albeit couched in obscene visual atmospherics) remains not only alive, but indeed, likely.


Nah, I’m all good!!

Troll harder
 

coolsteve

Juniors
Messages
1,555
[phantom just like the old david bowie songs finds big words in the encyclopedia and cuts them out, jumbles them up and theres a post, mind you , I think post no 158 is his best
 

sensesmaybenumbed

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
29,225
The stock media site that pic came from . . . . it wouldn't happen to be i-stock ? ( the graphic artists here will get it )
And back on topic . . . Bunniesman.
No, Alien.
God . . . it's too close to call.
Bunniesman has a thicker skin than this.
 

Zadar

Juniors
Messages
962
There’s some shots of robbies post event eye I am trying to upload that illustrate a “soft” or “dull” redness but nothing like the effects of the gouge I posted earlier.

Even so, without some evidence that his eye was ok beforehand, the redness presents as basically circumstantial without the requisite causation. A photo of him prior to that might be of help to the prosecution.

I suppose your own experience is a valid one to offer in corroboration of the gouge, but I submit that only where you and Robbie shared a similar physiological status.

It’s not unreasonable to suggest that Robbie as a footballer has sustained previous facial/eye injuries, hence making his skin more prone and succeptible tothe effects of friction, enlivening the reddish colour faster and with more effect than a person who may not have had a similar career with similar injuries and so forth.

Thank you for your post.
There’s some shots of robbies post event eye I am trying to upload that illustrate a “soft” or “dull” redness but nothing like the effects of the gouge I posted earlier.

Even so, without some evidence that his eye was ok beforehand, the redness presents as basically circumstantial without the requisite causation. A photo of him prior to that might be of help to the prosecution.

I suppose your own experience is a valid one to offer in corroboration of the gouge, but I submit that only where you and Robbie shared a similar physiological status.

It’s not unreasonable to suggest that Robbie as a footballer has sustained previous facial/eye injuries, hence making his skin more prone and succeptible tothe effects of friction, enlivening the reddish colour faster and with more effect than a person who may not have had a similar career with similar injuries and so forth.

Thank you for your post.

On the professor show on fox on Friday night, they showed footage of blood spurting out of Robbie’s eye, and his eye missing after the incident, it’s a pretty damning video, and going by that, I doubt burgess will play nrl again.
 

Attachments

  • 3B265756-4E35-4E3F-8AD4-97C94DF8F67B.jpeg
    3B265756-4E35-4E3F-8AD4-97C94DF8F67B.jpeg
    449.4 KB · Views: 7
Messages
17,258
A lot of you should be tackling the argument and not the person.

But a number of you prefer attend your on line jerk circle of whinging at the person making the point ...instead of addressing the real issues.

That mod obviously needs retraining and should re-read the forum rules he is supposed to uphold. He won’t admit fault, he seems to want to be popular.

Actually there is probably little point in offering an alternate view here because for the most part, one is just set upon and abused anyway. That’s mandated, licensed and encouraged. Hate unlimited.
 
Last edited:

Canard

Immortal
Messages
35,708
A lot of you should be tackling the argument and not the person.

But a number of you prefer attend your on line jerk circle of whinging at the person making the point ...instead of addressing the real issues.

That mod obviously needs retraining and should re-read the forum rules he is supposed to uphold. He won’t admit fault, he seems to want to be popular.

Actually there is probably little point in offering an alternate view here because for the most part, one is just set upon and abused anyway. That’s mandated, licensed and encouraged. Hate unlimited.

What a whiny little bitch
 

wibble

Bench
Messages
4,661
I think it is a bit rough on Burgess. Clearly the bar has been set, that fines should apply to foul play unless you are a rookie who needs a stern message sent.

Quibbling over the degree of penetration of the finger in the eye is a bit like arguing over the degree of pressure on the shoulder in a chicken wing tackle, although I'd say an eye gouge is an even filthier bit of play (and I'm pretty down on chicken wing tackles).

It might affect the severity of the penalty to some degree, but doesn't really change the fact that it is a disgusting bit of play that deserves a very lengthy suspension.

What human being in their line of work against a rival thinks "I might just try to poke their eye out, that will slow them up?". Eye gouging is a case where you could consider criminal charges in my opinion. Revolting behaviour, deserves double whatever suspension he gets.
 

The Rosco

Bench
Messages
2,909
Did Alien ever post pictures of the game ?
You have to jump through 27 hoops to get a gun permit, but it seems anyone can just walk up and buy a camera.
 

Latest posts

Top