Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Featured
European Champions & Challenge Cup
European Champions Cup Quater Final Saracens v Racing Metro
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RedruthRFC" data-source="post: 720174" data-attributes="member: 58362"><p>Peat's example aside, exactly. I would rather see the emphasis put the other way around, i.e. the ban given is what the committee sees as appropriate within the WR's guidelines, then extra time is added on if the player has failed to apologise, not conducted himself well at the hearing, failed to admit guilt or has plenty of previous. Just seems a more gentlemanly and transparent way of doing things.</p><p></p><p>Speaking of which, when is the last time a ban was extended on the basis of previous indiscretions?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RedruthRFC, post: 720174, member: 58362"] Peat's example aside, exactly. I would rather see the emphasis put the other way around, i.e. the ban given is what the committee sees as appropriate within the WR's guidelines, then extra time is added on if the player has failed to apologise, not conducted himself well at the hearing, failed to admit guilt or has plenty of previous. Just seems a more gentlemanly and transparent way of doing things. Speaking of which, when is the last time a ban was extended on the basis of previous indiscretions? [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Featured
European Champions & Challenge Cup
European Champions Cup Quater Final Saracens v Racing Metro
Top