[November Tests 2016 EOYT] England vs. Argentina (26/11/2016)

[RedruthRFC]

Apologies if I've missed it, but any news on Pieretto's disciplinary hearing? I know it doesn't matter as such as he wouldn't have been playing this weekend anyway, but why not get these things done and dusted in a timely fashion? Presumably the authorities would have had to if there was a game this weekend, if they feel they need longer than a week to hear the case properly, it makes a mockery of doing exactly that in most situations.

 

[ncurd]

http://sport.bt.com/rugby-union/arg...-for-seven-weeks-for-stamping-S11364117858522

Plead not guilty saying it didn't warrant a red card - 7 weeks - High-End 9 week reduced by 2 for mitigating factors. Should of been increased for saying it didn't warrant a red card.

- - - Updated - - -

Also he has no playing commitment until Feb and will playing again by March.....surely these bans should be listed in games not weeks...

 

[RedruthRFC]

http://sport.bt.com/rugby-union/arg...-for-seven-weeks-for-stamping-S11364117858522

Plead not guilty saying it didn't warrant a red card - 7 weeks - High-End 9 week reduced by 2 for mitigating factors. Should of been increased for saying it didn't warrant a red card.

- - - Updated - - -

Also he has no playing commitment until Feb and will playing again by March.....surely these bans should be listed in games not weeks...

Thanks ncurd, it had indeed passed me by. My guess of six weeks wasn't too far off, albeit that I was basing it on mid range kicking rather than top end stamping / trampling (not sure how I missed the fact that they are listed separately, which is why I was a week short. It didn't take Nostradamus to predict that two weeks would be chopped off whatever sanction he got as (I believe) was discussed above. I'd still rather see a bad record / lack of contrition / poor conduct adding to a ban rather than the opposites of these things reducing it, but it is consistent with how sanctions are applied. I would also question what the point of requiring a player to submit a guilty / innocent plea is if disagreeing with the citing committee isn't going to extend the sanction received.

I take your point about bans lasting for a number of games, not weeks. IIRC it's not that long ago that controversial bans were handed out that were at least in part expired during periods in which the player wouldn't have been playing! However, I can't think of a system that isn't open to being "gamed". I can't remember the details, but seem to remember a case of a player being farmed out to his club side who happened to have a mid week game in order to knock one off the ban. Particularly in the pre-season, when games can come thick and fast, clubs would no doubt argue that a banned player would have been involved in every game that the club has scheduled including the ladies XV and the U8s Tag team in order to knock games off a ban as quickly as possible.

If anything, weeks seems less open to abuse as long as the international windows and start dates of pre-seasons are clearly defined and agreed upon.