Judiciary Happenings
-
@Stargazer said in Judiciary Happenings:
Tonga hooker Paula Ngauamo suspended for seven weeks
The disciplinary hearing in relation to the citing of Tonga hooker Paula Ngauamo for an act of foul play contrary to Law 9.12 (kicking) in their Rugby World Cup 2019 Pool C match against USA took place in Tokyo on 15 October. The independent Judicial Committee was chaired by Alan Hudson (Canada) joined by former international player Stefan Terblanche (South Africa) and former referee Valeriu Toma (Romania). The player admitted that he had kicked his opponent in the face and accepted this was at least mid-range offending as he had made contact with his opponent’s head. The committee agreed and applied World Rugby’s mandatory minimum mid-range entry point, which was introduced in 2017 to protect player welfare, deter high contact and prevent head injuries. This resulted in a starting point of an eight-week suspension. Taking into account the mitigating factors that are considered in relation to sanction, including the player’s early admission and disciplinary record, the committee reduced the eight-week entry point by one week, resulting in a sanction of seven weeks. Ngauamo is returning to Tonga today prior to resuming club duty with Agen in the Top 14. The player will be suspended for his next seven weeks of club rugby on his return to France..
Only 1 week deduction for the player’s early admission and disciplinary record. Not 50%, I wonder why?
(the full decision hasn't been published, yet).Previous form and he didn;t turn up to the court session, or whatever it's called. Dipshit
@Machpants Yep, stupid. He could have asked for a different date & time for the disciplinary hearing, if the initial appointment didn't suit him because of his travel. The cited Uruguayan did that, too. His French club won't be happy.
-
@mariner4life said in Judiciary Happenings:
that doesn't look like an official image, I'll wait for confirmation
Fucking hell Skeen haven't you caused enough trouble?
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
@mariner4life said in Judiciary Happenings:
that doesn't look like an official image, I'll wait for confirmation
Fucking hell Skeen haven't you caused enough trouble?
I'm just going to show you another angle
-
@Snowy said in Judiciary Happenings:
Some high quality piss taking today on several threads.
When we're bored, this happens...
Or the Politics thread gives the mods a migraine...
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
@Snowy said in Judiciary Happenings:
Some high quality piss taking today on several threads.
When we're bored, this happens...
Or the Politics thread gives the mods a migraine...
There’s a politics thread?
-
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
@Snowy said in Judiciary Happenings:
Some high quality piss taking today on several threads.
When we're bored, this happens...
Or the Politics thread gives the mods a migraine...
There’s a politics thread?
@ACT-Crusader said in Judiciary Happenings:
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
@Snowy said in Judiciary Happenings:
Some high quality piss taking today on several threads.
When we're bored, this happens...
Or the Politics thread gives the mods a migraine...
There’s a politics thread?
Subforum, maybe. You might have set it to "Ignore" as it was generally a bunch of old men getting shouty about bullshit.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Judiciary Happenings:
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
@Snowy said in Judiciary Happenings:
Some high quality piss taking today on several threads.
When we're bored, this happens...
Or the Politics thread gives the mods a migraine...
There’s a politics thread?
Subforum, maybe. You might have set it to "Ignore" as it was generally a bunch of old men getting shouty about bullshit.
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
it was generally a bunch of old men getting shouty about bullshit.
And some Polish chicks apparently.
Out of interest how would you differentiate that from the rest of The Fern forums?
-
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
it was generally a bunch of old men getting shouty about bullshit.
And some Polish chicks apparently.
Out of interest how would you differentiate that from the rest of The Fern forums?
@Snowy said in Judiciary Happenings:
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
it was generally a bunch of old men getting shouty about bullshit.
And some Polish chicks apparently.
Out of interest how would you differentiate that from the rest of The Fern forums?
Wait what? Do tell.
-
@Snowy said in Judiciary Happenings:
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
it was generally a bunch of old men getting shouty about bullshit.
And some Polish chicks apparently.
Out of interest how would you differentiate that from the rest of The Fern forums?
Wait what? Do tell.
@Nepia Was in another thread about the demographics of this place. There were a surprising number of posts by women (or posters who identify as such) and Poland was also quite high in the ratings of places that people post from. So in good Fern fashion I put 2 and 2 together and got 81 - most people that post here are Polish chicks.
I'm actually Lena from Krakow which might explain it.
-
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
it was generally a bunch of old men getting shouty about bullshit.
And some Polish chicks apparently.
Out of interest how would you differentiate that from the rest of The Fern forums?
@Snowy said in Judiciary Happenings:
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
it was generally a bunch of old men getting shouty about bullshit.
And some Polish chicks apparently.
Out of interest how would you differentiate that from the rest of The Fern forums?
Rugby isn't bullshit
-
@Snowy said in Judiciary Happenings:
@NTA said in Judiciary Happenings:
it was generally a bunch of old men getting shouty about bullshit.
And some Polish chicks apparently.
Out of interest how would you differentiate that from the rest of The Fern forums?
Rugby isn't bullshit
-
@TeWaio Me as well, thought Barnes was a bit cheeky there. It deserved a TMO look, but I think he knew it could well be a red if it went to the TMO lottery. So went immediate yellow to avoid controversy.
To be fair there were a few aerial challenges in that game that would have been straight yellow in super rugby as well.
-
@TeWaio Me as well, thought Barnes was a bit cheeky there. It deserved a TMO look, but I think he knew it could well be a red if it went to the TMO lottery. So went immediate yellow to avoid controversy.
To be fair there were a few aerial challenges in that game that would have been straight yellow in super rugby as well.
@mooshld that was as close to a red as a yellow can get imo. I think that's why Barnes jumped on the shoulder first contact and went yellow asap. I thought he handled other contact situations pretty well, compared to other refs that'd get card happy.
But soooo close to red, and who knows what might have happened!
-
@TeWaio said in Judiciary Happenings:
Can't wait for the Beast update on this thread....
Here's your update: no citing. The window (36 hours after conclusion of the match) has closed.
-
@TeWaio said in Judiciary Happenings:
Can't wait for the Beast update on this thread....
Here's your update: no citing. The window (36 hours after conclusion of the match) has closed.
-
@Billy-Webb
But, but, but what are half the people on this site going to do if they can't argue with a citing despite virtually none of them ever actually having reffed and or read a law book?????????? -
@Frank hahaha. True. But then again, lack of knowledge has hardly ever stopped any of us from adding our 2c
@Billy-Webb said in Judiciary Happenings:
@Frank hahaha. True. But then again, lack of knowledge has hardly ever stopped any of us from adding
our 2cto that lack of knowledgeFixed
