英格兰名宿对世界橄榄球组织关于埃本·埃特泽贝斯禁赛的纪律程序“和大家一样困惑”

英格兰名宿对世界橄榄球组织关于埃本·埃特泽贝斯禁赛的纪律程序“和大家一样困惑”

2025-12-15Sports
--:--
--:--
雷总
Good morning Norris1,我是雷总,欢迎收听为你专属打造的 Goose Pod。今天是12月15日星期一,现在是上午11点52分。今天我们要聊的话题有点意思,连英格兰的名宿都对此感到“极其困惑”,这背后到底是一套什么样的产品逻辑?
小撒1
大家好,我是小撒1!咱们今天要聊的这个事儿啊,发生在橄榄球界,简直就是一出“罗生门”。主角是南非球星埃本·埃特泽贝斯,他因为“插眼”被禁赛了,但这个判罚结果出来后,大家都觉得:哎?这剧本不对啊?Norris1,咱们赶紧来扒一扒。
雷总
咱们先看核心参数。在南非队73比0大胜威尔士的比赛中,埃特泽贝斯在第79分钟,也就是比赛快结束的时候,因为用手接触了威尔士球员亚历克斯·曼恩的眼睛,被红牌罚下。纪律委员会最终给了他12周的禁赛。
小撒1
这就好比你打游戏,水晶都要推掉了,结果你在泉水门口给了对方一个大嘴巴子,图啥呢?而且最逗的是,委员会认定他是“故意”插眼。按理说故意插眼是重罪,起步价都是18周,最高能判4年,结果这哥们儿最后只领了12周的套餐。
雷总
这确实不符合常理。要知道,在产品设计里,严重违规通常对应的是封号处理。但这次判罚虽然认定是“故意”,却因为各种所谓的“减刑因子”,把刑期缩短了。这就好比手机严重发热,结果厂家说是为了冬天给你暖手,这逻辑用户能买账吗?
小撒1
所以啊,连行家都看不下去了。前英格兰名将布莱恩·摩尔,这老哥可不简单,他不光是前职业球员,还是个执业律师!他在《每日电讯报》专栏里直接开炮,说虽然自己深谙此道,但现在的判罚标准让他“和大家一样困惑”。
雷总
你想想,一个既懂代码又懂业务的资深架构师,都看不懂这个系统的运行逻辑,那说明什么?说明这个系统本身就存在严重的Bug,或者说它的算法完全是不透明的。摩尔质疑的正是这种判罚标准的不确定性。
小撒1
而且埃特泽贝斯的辩护理由也绝了,他说他当时以为自己要被那个威尔士小伙子“像布娃娃一样甩来甩去”,所以才出于自卫。这画面感太强了,一个两米多的壮汉说怕被小个子甩飞,这演技,奥斯卡欠他一个小金人啊。
雷总
这里面最核心的冲突,其实是资源的分配不公。摩尔一针见血地指出,听证会的结果往往取决于你能请得起什么样的律师。大牌球队有顶级法务团队,能把黑的说成白的,这不就是典型的“氪金玩家”吊打“普通用户”吗?这极不公平。
小撒1
没错!这就是传说中的“钞能力”。而且还有一个巨大的漏洞,埃特泽贝斯虽然被禁赛了,但他转头就在鲨鱼队当起了教练。这好比驾照被吊销了,不能开车,但我可以坐在副驾驶教你开车啊!这禁赛禁了个寂寞吗?
雷总
这绝对是系统逻辑上的重大漏洞。禁赛的初衷是惩罚,是为了让违规者付出代价。如果他还能以教练身份参与球队运作,那这个惩罚的痛感就大大降低了。这就相当于你封了我的号,但我还能用游客模式继续在游戏里指点江山。
小撒1
这种操作直接把球迷和专家都惹毛了。名哨奈杰尔·欧文斯直言这就是个“烂摊子”。大家最气不过的是,这12周禁赛正好在休赛期和俱乐部比赛期间,等到了2026年国家队比赛,他又是一条好汉,一场国家队比赛都没耽误。
雷总
这简直就是精准计算过的“无损禁赛”。这种处理方式严重损害了世界橄榄球组织的公信力。对于用户——也就是球迷来说,他们看到的是规则被权力和金钱玩弄,这种糟糕的用户体验,长期来看会毁了这个品牌的。
小撒1
所以啊,未来这规则必须得改。摩尔老哥呼吁世界橄榄球组织赶紧把“禁赛期间当教练”这个漏洞给堵上。不然以后大家都学样,犯了规就转岗,那纪律委员会不就成摆设了吗?
雷总
没错,必须进行版本迭代,修复这些已知的Bug。规则必须是刚性的,不能有这么多弹性的解释空间。只有建立一个透明、公正、不可被“黑客”攻击的纪律系统,这项运动才能健康发展,这也是我们做产品的一贯追求。
小撒1
说得太对了。今天的瓜就吃到这儿,希望能等到橄榄球界“系统升级”的那一天。感谢Norris1的收听,咱们下期节目,继续为您带来最犀利的解读!
雷总
今天的讨论就到这里。感谢收听 Goose Pod,即使规则充满困惑,我们也要保持清醒的头脑。Norris1,咱们明天见!

英格兰名宿对世界橄榄球组织关于埃本·埃特泽贝斯禁赛的纪律程序“和大家一样困惑”。埃特泽贝斯因“故意插眼”被禁赛12周,但减刑理由和辩护均显牵强。他还能转任教练,引发对规则漏洞、资源分配不公及公信力受损的质疑。

England great ‘almost as confused as everybody else’ by World Rugby’s disciplinary process after Eben Etzebeth ban

Read original at PlanetRugby

Former England and British & Irish Lions hooker Brian Moore admits to being puzzled by World Rugby’s disciplinary process after Springboks lock Eben Etzebeth recently received a 12-match suspension for foul play. Etzebeth was suspended on Thursday after he was found to have ‘intentionally’ eye-gouged Wales flanker Alex Mann during a Autumn Nations Series Test in Cardiff on November 29.

The Springboks‘ most capped Test player will spend the next few months on the sidelines and miss most of the Sharks’ season after the panel deemed that he committed a mid-range offence. Etzebeth initially received an 18-week suspension which was reduced by six weeks after factors such as his previous record were taken into consideration.

Etzebeth won’t miss any Springboks Tests It has subsequently been revealed that the 34-year-old will take up a coaching role with the Sharks while serving his suspension, which only covers club fixtures and not any Springboks Tests. Etzebeth’s suspension has led to widespread debate in the game with many fans believing the punishment was too light while there have also been questions over how the length of his suspension was decided.

Writing in his Telegraph column, Moore revealed that he is not “unfamiliar with the way things work” in rugby’s disciplinary process as he has served suspensions for foul play during his time as a player and also “represented a number of players as part of my law practice” after he retired as a player.

Moore admitted that despite his knowledge of rugby’s disciplinary process, he is “almost as confused as everybody else as to what level of sanction is applied to what offence” in the modern game. The 63-year-old urged World Rugby to clarify how their disciplinary system works and revealed that “there is a widespread feeling that the bigger and better teams get favours that are denied your average player.

” Eben Etzebeth ‘devastated’ after eye-gouging ban as Sharks put Springboks lock to work Moore also revealed that in most cases the outcomes at hearings depended on who defends the players who are facing disciplinary action. “What is certainly true is that the ultimate outcome of a disciplinary hearing very much depends on what legal representation you can afford, which should not be a factor but undoubtedly is,” he wrote.

“It is for this reason that with any touring party or any World Cup squad, one of the most important choices is which legal counsel you take with you. The difference between an in-tournament ban of one game or three can have a very real influence on how your side fares.” Moore also questioned Etzebeth’s defence which revealed that he had to defend himself after fearing that he would be rag-dolled by Mann and suggested that that was a bid to “to manipulate the system” from the Boks enforcer and his legal team.

“In the recent Eben Etzebeth case, a 12-week ban for gouging was handed down by a panel that included Leon Lloyd, a former professional player and a very bright man, and someone who knows how players and their representatives try to manipulate the system,” he wrote. ‘I don’t believe that Etzebeth is afraid of anybody’ “Etzebeth’s claim was that he genuinely thought that he was about to be “rag-dolled” by Wales’ Alex Mann and therefore reacted as he did.

I don’t believe that Etzebeth is afraid of anybody and in a set-to between those two players there would only be one winner, and that man wouldn’t be wearing a red shirt. It is far more likely that Etzebeth was angry with the confrontation and determined to sort it out. “This view of the offence bears out the finding that his act was intentional and Etzebeth was not acting in self-defence in any meaningful way.

The vague notion of provocation was only marginally relevant, hence Etzebeth was not given the now customary discount of 50 per cent off his sentence.” While Moore did not have a problem with Etzebeth’s previous disciplinary record being taken into account when his suspension was decided, he agrees with most fans who are unhappy that the player will not miss any Springboks matches and will now help with coaching the Sharks’ junior teams during his ban.

“Credit was rightly given for this being the first red card in Etzebeth’s 141-cap Test career, but the fact is that the ban will have no effect on his international career,” Moore added. “What really does not sit right with most rugby fans is that Etzebeth has been able to move from being a Sharks’ player to one of their coaches whilst he is serving his ban.

That sort of loophole is something that World Rugby should consider closing immediately.” READ MORE: Eben Etzebeth fate revealed as Springboks star learns punishment for eye-gouge against Wales

Analysis

Conflict+
Related Info+
Core Event+
Background+
Impact+
Future+