Thank you Neil. I did look this up and found an article on "Wales Online", that had the information you provided, but no further explanation for the length of the suspension. It is quite a long suspension, but hopefully people won't give in to the impulse to do such a thing again. I thinks it's an incident that is more weird than anything else.
No full report that I've seen Purdo, simply excerpts such as;
A statement read: “The disciplinary committee found that the act of foul play warranted a low-end entry point (12 weeks’ suspension) and reduced that by three weeks to take account of mitigating factors (including good character and remorse) but increased it by one week to take account of his most recent disciplinary record.
“Marler is therefore suspended for 10 weeks and, given his playing schedule, is free to resume playing on Monday, 8 June 2020. He was reminded of his right of appeal.”
Tuilagi was sent off in the 75th minute of the game for a no-arms tackle on George North.
The Leicester man argued the offence did not warrant a red card but the committee disagreed, finding him guilty of a dangerous charge and banning him for six weeks.
That was reduced to four on account of other factors, including good conduct and immediate remorse. He can play again from April 14.
Lawes was cited after a challenge on Jones. He accepted he had committed foul play but successfully argued it was not a red card offence.
To me, the punch would be much worse, as it may physically harm someone. Most footballers would see the funny side of the incident as a jest. However if Joe was actually mak7ng an unwanted sexual approach, I would have banned him for life. Sorry, that's how my very old football head thinks
including “good character” and “remorse” apparently (despite previous poor record which had the ban increased by a week). surely every single person charged would have that so why have it as a way to reduce the ban?
neil hasnt been willing to explain himself to date and is just doing it for reaction now. best accept that there will always be inexplicable opinions. often (not coincdentally) those holding these opinions are the least equipped to explain them.
what were the mitigating circumstances that got him 2 less weeks i wonder? (guess i could check it out for myself)
Right wing nuts are like the kids in the class who need attention to feel relevant. He’s somehow tried to join an ideological bow to being PC.... cmon Piers he’s grabbed a blokes genitals in the hope that his opposing number would hit him and get red carded.
No one is offended Piers, it’s just illegal play and I think you’re trying to connect Folau and this bloke in some confused ideological connection, presumably about being too PC.
Move on from your under rock of angry shouty.insignificance, and don’t try and make every issue about political point. The rules were broken, penalty given, move on.
Dictionary.com gives the following definitions of the word brilliant
1. shining brightly; sparkling; glittering; lustrous
2. distinguished; illustrious:
3. having or showing great intelligence, talent, quality,
4. strong and clear in tone; vivid; bright
Pls let me know which best applies to Joe's willy tickle?
BeastieBoy
Roar Rookie
It was sexual assault. He should have got 12 months.
pm
Roar Rookie
Only just saw the Tuilagi hit. i thought it was barely a yellow, not much in it at all.
badmanners
Roar Rookie
Piers is too busy stroking his own to grab anyone else's.
Double Agent
Guest
10 weeks? Wow. You can drop players from a great height onto their head and get less than 10 weeks.
Purdo
Roar Rookie
Thank you Neil. I did look this up and found an article on "Wales Online", that had the information you provided, but no further explanation for the length of the suspension. It is quite a long suspension, but hopefully people won't give in to the impulse to do such a thing again. I thinks it's an incident that is more weird than anything else.
Neil Back
Roar Rookie
No full report that I've seen Purdo, simply excerpts such as; A statement read: “The disciplinary committee found that the act of foul play warranted a low-end entry point (12 weeks’ suspension) and reduced that by three weeks to take account of mitigating factors (including good character and remorse) but increased it by one week to take account of his most recent disciplinary record. “Marler is therefore suspended for 10 weeks and, given his playing schedule, is free to resume playing on Monday, 8 June 2020. He was reminded of his right of appeal.” Tuilagi was sent off in the 75th minute of the game for a no-arms tackle on George North. The Leicester man argued the offence did not warrant a red card but the committee disagreed, finding him guilty of a dangerous charge and banning him for six weeks. That was reduced to four on account of other factors, including good conduct and immediate remorse. He can play again from April 14. Lawes was cited after a challenge on Jones. He accepted he had committed foul play but successfully argued it was not a red card offence.
Piers is as much a plonker as Marler.
Bruce Peters
Roar Rookie
Well said :happy: :happy:
Bobby
Roar Rookie
To me, the punch would be much worse, as it may physically harm someone. Most footballers would see the funny side of the incident as a jest. However if Joe was actually mak7ng an unwanted sexual approach, I would have banned him for life. Sorry, that's how my very old football head thinks
Purdo
Roar Rookie
Bobby, It's at the high end of what I thought would be reasonable 5- 10 weeks. How would it compare with throwing a reasonably hard punch?
Purdo
Roar Rookie
Neil: Are these the actual outcomes of the tribunal hearings? Where were they published, and was any reasoning given? If so I'd like to read it.
soapit
Roar Guru
yep, a lot of talk about this being a joke between mates, jones comments after should have put an end to that,
soapit
Roar Guru
including “good character” and “remorse” apparently (despite previous poor record which had the ban increased by a week). surely every single person charged would have that so why have it as a way to reduce the ban?
soapit
Roar Guru
neil hasnt been willing to explain himself to date and is just doing it for reaction now. best accept that there will always be inexplicable opinions. often (not coincdentally) those holding these opinions are the least equipped to explain them. what were the mitigating circumstances that got him 2 less weeks i wonder? (guess i could check it out for myself)
Charlie
Guest
Right wing nuts are like the kids in the class who need attention to feel relevant. He’s somehow tried to join an ideological bow to being PC.... cmon Piers he’s grabbed a blokes genitals in the hope that his opposing number would hit him and get red carded. No one is offended Piers, it’s just illegal play and I think you’re trying to connect Folau and this bloke in some confused ideological connection, presumably about being too PC. Move on from your under rock of angry shouty.insignificance, and don’t try and make every issue about political point. The rules were broken, penalty given, move on.
Neil Back
Roar Rookie
Oh, number 4. Without a doubt. I’ll leave the rest of you to work it out.
Wal
Roar Guru
Humorous to who? If I don't want my genitals touched I shouldn't have to put up with it. End of story.
Sgt Pepperoni
Roar Rookie
Dictionary.com gives the following definitions of the word brilliant 1. shining brightly; sparkling; glittering; lustrous 2. distinguished; illustrious: 3. having or showing great intelligence, talent, quality, 4. strong and clear in tone; vivid; bright Pls let me know which best applies to Joe's willy tickle?
Bobby
Roar Rookie
A lot of time out for a humouress "handshake". Agree with Piers, the world's gone crazy.
Neil Back
Roar Rookie
Marler gets 10, Tui 4, and Lawes exonerated. Seems about right. Still brilliant.