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
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2015
Potential citings for Quarterfinals
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="Cruz_del_Sur" data-source="post: 759975" data-attributes="member: 55747"><p>The longest ban came from something that was completely unintentional and resulted in no injury or disadvantage for the affected player/team. I am biased because it affects my team, but i can see how the TMO could have missed that one. </p><p></p><p>The lowest ban resulted from a player who intentionally punched an opponent while he is looking the other way. It's not his first time either (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI1M0EeIgdg&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank">video here</a>), yet his sentence gets reduced for "his good disciplinary record". To add insult to injury, it is incomprehensible how the TMO missed that one given the context. </p><p></p><p>Don't even get me started about Pocock. </p><p></p><p>The problem i have is that when i read Galarza's citing transcript i found its logic sound. I still find the final decision "unfair" when bench-marked against other sentences so i can only conclude i just dislike some of the rules. Not much i can do i guess. </p><p>Just venting tbh.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cruz_del_Sur, post: 759975, member: 55747"] The longest ban came from something that was completely unintentional and resulted in no injury or disadvantage for the affected player/team. I am biased because it affects my team, but i can see how the TMO could have missed that one. The lowest ban resulted from a player who intentionally punched an opponent while he is looking the other way. It's not his first time either ([URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI1M0EeIgdg&feature=youtu.be"]video here[/URL]), yet his sentence gets reduced for "his good disciplinary record". To add insult to injury, it is incomprehensible how the TMO missed that one given the context. Don't even get me started about Pocock. The problem i have is that when i read Galarza's citing transcript i found its logic sound. I still find the final decision "unfair" when bench-marked against other sentences so i can only conclude i just dislike some of the rules. Not much i can do i guess. Just venting tbh. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2015
Potential citings for Quarterfinals
Top