Upholding Rugby Union Laws - Who is in the Right?

Discussion in 'Sports, Adventure Training and Events' started by TheNutlessMonkey, Jul 22, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. There have been a number of stories coming out over the last month or so that have shown that there is definitely something barking going on with the different committees charged with upholding the law.

    The case of Burger and the eye-gouging is probably the highest profile. If he had been charged with eye-gouging he would have been banned for a minimum of 12 weeks, a la Alan Quinlan. Burger was charged with unsportsman like conduct if memory serves (as was Parisse for an 'eye-gouging' offence for a similar ban).

    Then you have Justin Harrison and the drugs charges, he gets banned for 8 months by the RFU. Stevens gets 12 months for the same offence playing at the same club, surely Harrison's ban should have been longer? I know he retired but seriously...

    Then the case of Tom Williams and the 'fake' Blood bin incident during the European Cup. The club are fine £215,000 and Williams gets banned for 12 months by the European Cup Panel. The player gets banned after the Director of Rugby and two medical staff from the club get let off for the same charges. How does that work?

    How can you have any respect for the Law makers and upholders when they themselves cannot maintain consistent when dealing with offences that seem to every one else to be identical??

    Now you have the SA Rugby going in front of the IRB for the Arm bands they wore in the final test. Lets see what kind of nonsense comes from that.

    And breathe. Rant over