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
Rugby Union
Super Rugby
[2015 Super Rugby] Sharks vs. Chiefs (Round 6) 21/03/2015
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="smartcooky" data-source="post: 718641" data-attributes="member: 20605"><p>Shaggy</p><p></p><p>Both players were charged at the Low End entry point of 4 weeks. Here are the reasons for the difference in the length of suspension</p><p></p><p><strong>Liam Gill</strong></p><p>[TEXTAREA]"Mitigating factors taken into account for determining final sanction include the player admitted the offence. He has an exemplary disciplinary record having never been cited before and has represented Australia at both U20 and Test level. His contribution to rugby in general has been outstanding and he clearly expressed remorse for committing the offence and for having tarnished his record with this incident. I considered a 50 per cent reduction in suspension was appropriate after taking these mitigating factors into account. As a result, a two-week sanction was considered to be appropriate.[/TEXTAREA]</p><p></p><p><strong>Francois Steyn</strong></p><p>The full judicial hearing details have not yet been published but I'll bet that he got the full four match suspension because there is no mitigation for previous good conduct (he has form) and no mitigation for remorse because he plead not guilty and defended his actions.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="smartcooky, post: 718641, member: 20605"] Shaggy Both players were charged at the Low End entry point of 4 weeks. Here are the reasons for the difference in the length of suspension [B]Liam Gill[/B] [TEXTAREA]"Mitigating factors taken into account for determining final sanction include the player admitted the offence. He has an exemplary disciplinary record having never been cited before and has represented Australia at both U20 and Test level. His contribution to rugby in general has been outstanding and he clearly expressed remorse for committing the offence and for having tarnished his record with this incident. I considered a 50 per cent reduction in suspension was appropriate after taking these mitigating factors into account. As a result, a two-week sanction was considered to be appropriate.[/TEXTAREA] [B]Francois Steyn[/B] The full judicial hearing details have not yet been published but I'll bet that he got the full four match suspension because there is no mitigation for previous good conduct (he has form) and no mitigation for remorse because he plead not guilty and defended his actions. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
Super Rugby
[2015 Super Rugby] Sharks vs. Chiefs (Round 6) 21/03/2015
Top