IT HAS BEEN four long years, but Ian Harte will taste Premier League football again next season.
The 34-year-old former Ireland international was an ever-present in the Reading team which won automatic promotion from the Championship but, with his current contract up this summer, it was uncertain whether he would be at the Berkshire club come August.
However, it was announced today that the full-back, who scored four goals and was named in the Championship Team of the Year for the second year running, has signed a new deal which will take him up to the summer of 2013.
Harte played 213 games for Leeds United between 1995 and 2004 before departing for Spanish side Levante. He failed to settle in La Liga and Roy Keane offered him a return to England with Sunderland in 2007.
The Louth native only made four appearances, however, and was released after a year. A brief stint with Blackpool was followed by a move to Carlisle United, where Harte rediscovered his form and caught the eye of the Royals.
“It’s a dream come true to go back to the Premier League,” Harte said on the club website.
Two years ago the manager took a chance on me and gave me the opportunity to come to a fantastic club like Reading. And I’ve had two of the best years of my career here.
“I’m absolutely delighted. Now that it’s all sorted, I can go away and enjoy the summer, thoroughly look forward to next season and come back raring to go.”
Manager Brian McDermott added: “It’s a fantastic story, if you consider that two years ago Ian had been written off in certain quarters, and yet now he is a Premier League player again.
“That tells you everything you need to know about the person, the player, his resilience, his character, his determination and his quality. He still has that burning desire in training every day to play at the highest level. So I’m delighted that Ian has signed a new contract.”
Crazy decision. Completely accidental clash of heads.
A five game ban for this is outrageous. How is a decision like that arrived at. It was clearly accidental.
Cant watch the clips because I’m in Australia ffs. But the fans I’ve spoke to say it’s a yellow a most and even that’s harsh. Any truth to this??
@Dara: no
@Dara: Do they not have YouTube in Australia ?
Shameful decision. Warranted a yellow card at best. He’ll be badly missed for the ECC games where his brawn and explosive speed would have levelled things up for Connacht.
Whatever about whether it was right or wrong, how can they suspend 1 week off the 6 week ban for ‘remorse’ when the red card was challenged? Surely that is a prime indication that not alone was there no remorse but the feeling was that it wasn’t even a red card. This incident aside, I would be concerned that the judicial process is flawed on that basis.
His biggest mistake was not being Owen Farrell.
I think he’s a lucky lad to only get 5 weeks, accidental or not he clearly didn’t learn his lesson from the last high shot.
@Jim Demps: I don’t think people here understand. The tackler has an obligation to tackle safely. Accidental or not he has made head to head contact which could have been avoided. The player doesn’t dip in fact he may even come up a little at impact. It’s a clear red and when it’s your second of the season 5 weeks seems lenient.
@Jim Demps: It was an accidental clash of heads after the attacking player changed his running line. I think 5 weeks is harsh, I’d love to see how they arrived at this decision. He does need to lower his tackle height though. Owen Farrell only got 5 weeks for tackle on Charlie Atkinson and in terms of intent those tackles are like chalk and cheese. With Farrells tackling track record it should have been far longer.
@Jayme Mc Goldrick: yeah that’s it. Accidental or not the outcome is still a dangerous tackle. I get why people are annoyed, I’d probably be the same if it was a munster player but it’s not like it’s a new rule, a head shot has never been legal.
@MacEoin.T: I think the decision is pretty clear, he got 6 weeks the first time and it was reduced to 3 for having a clear record. He then got 6 weeks this time and didn’t get the reduction for having a clear record. If anything I’d be saying he didn’t deserve the one week reduction given he clearly hasn’t learnt his lesson.
@Jim Demps: Out of interest, does a player get a clear record at the beginning of each season or is it a pro career duration timeframe?
@MacEoin.T: I know in the amateur game in Ireland they look at your records for 5 years so I assume it’s probably something similar. They definitely don’t get a clean slate at the start of the season anyway. Punishing repeat offenders more harshly I think is a good way to go. Like if Papalli gets sent off again for another high shot I’d say he could be looking at 10+ weeks.
@Jim Demps: he’ll be back in time for the game against Munster on the 9th of January Jim. We’ll get a proper look at him in action then.
@Jim Demps: Would you stop Jim, Farrell got the same ban for trying to take Atkinson’s head off and you’re arguing the Papali’i deserves the same? You’re dreaming lad.
@Paddy Kennedy: I’m not arguing anything, I’m saying that’s how it works. Farrell actually got a 10 week ban reduced by half for a first offence. Farrells was worse and he got a bigger ban, papalli is in the dock for the second time in four games and gets less of a reduction. It’s fairly straightforward
@David Finn: great stuff, hopefully he takes the time between now and then to learn how to tackle in Union. He’ll be a serious player once he irons out those mistakes.
@Paddy Kennedy: It was Farrell’s first red so he got more lenient treatment. The fact that Farrell should have had plenty of reds in recent seasons can’t be taken into account.
Players & coaches have to understand how seriously World Rugby is taking head injuries and act accordingly. That means a lower body position in any potential tackle situation.
Clearly difficult to get it right all the time so some players will get unlucky from time to time. Lack of intent doesn’t seem to be a mitigating factor.
Crazy biased decision.
That makes no sense. How the ref made out he led with his head is beyond me. The attacking player steps and papali has to change direction to make the tackle, their heads collide. 5 games is ridiculous.
Outrageous decision! Ref & TMO bottled it!!
I really don’t understand all the comments arguing that this is somehow disproportionate. It was a clear red card, it was clear he was going to get a significant ban and if he doesn’t learn how to tackle lower he’s going to miss more games than he plays. Crazy decision by Connacht to contest this and I’d argue you shouldn’t get a reduction if you contest the decision, as you’re clearly not remorseful if you think you didn’t commit an offence.
The hypocrisy on this forum , when it was Peter O Mahony deliberately targeting someone’s head in the ruck with his shoulder a few weeks ago (imo, is much worse than an accidental clash of heads) people here were saying ‘he was frustrated’ and ‘playing on the edge’!