Rugby Europe Championship 2018

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

This is actually WR fault as it is their regulations. They were to lazy to have a database with players blocked. An well run excel would suffice.

And the unions can't think for themselves?

 

[amz]

Does anybody know if a player was captured by an Union who used him in 7s before 1st July 2017?

 

[beerholder]

Players banned after the Belgium - Spain match for abusing the ref.

• Guillaume ROUET (n°9): physical abuse of a Match Official and verbal abuse: 36 weeks
• Sébastien ROUET (n°20): physical abuse of a Match Official and verbal abuse: 43 weeks
• Pierre BARTHERE (n°6): threatening actions/words at a Match Official: 14 weeks
• Lucas GUILLAUME (n°7): threatening actions/words at a Match Official: 14 weeks
• Mathieu BELIE (n°10): threatening actions/words at a Match Official: 14 weeks

 

[amz]

Lenient...

 

[die_mole]

They'll probably be cut in half after appeal.

There's no way the 43 week ban holds up.

And those are actually pretty heavy punishments compared to other referee abuse punishments.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

So all will be available for the next REC and of course the RWC. Plus, apart from the two who carried out a physical assault the others will essentially be ready for the start of the next domestic season?

http://www.rugbyeurope.eu/decision-rugby-europe-judicial-committee

It seems quite lenient unless there is an internal report that is of the opinion that the ref's performance was a provocation. I think they'd be well advised to not appeal and quietly accept their punishment.

Meanwhile the ref with the bloodied face may effectively get a lifetime ban from refereeing matches of that level. That would be a bit of a contrast in "justice".

 

[amz]

They'll probably be cut in half after appeal.

There's no way the 43 week ban holds up.

And those are actually pretty heavy punishments compared to other referee abuse punishments.

Why would not stay as this? What new evidence do you think they can bring to justify such a huge cut?

 

[die_mole]

Cause almost every appeal is granted with a dude just saying "I'm sorry I won't do it again". They make the bans extra long so that they will be long after appeal.

 

[amz]

Cause almost every appeal is granted with a dude just saying "I'm sorry I won't do it again". They make the bans extra long so that they will be long after appeal.

To reduce a sanction you have to have some reasons, you can't just halve it because someone appeals. This is urban legend Have a read:

http://www.worldrugby.org/wr-resour...ok/EN/pubData/source/files/Regulation18_1.pdf

Bans are actually short for what they did. I am surprised they found some mitigating factors. Btw, apologies have real value when are made outside of judicial procedures...

 

[Brigantine]

So all will be available for the next REC and of course the RWC.

But the first 2 will miss the Repechage Tournament

"The misconduct complaint against the Spanish Rugby Union was suspended and a further hearing date will be set." - well that keeps things interesting.

Most important of all... nothing we've heard so far indicated any match results have been overturned? (except Tahiti vs Cook Islands)

 

[lado85]

But the first 2 will miss the Repechage Tournament

"The misconduct complaint against the Spanish Rugby Union was suspended and a further hearing date will be set." - well that keeps things interesting.

Most important of all... nothing we've heard so far indicated any match results have been overturned? (except Tahiti vs Cook Islands)

2003 WC european qualification round 5 - Russia - Spain. Russia won 58–41 on aggregate. However, after it was determined they used ineligible South African players, they were ejected from the competition and Spain advanced to Repechage