Dupuy and Attoub appeal - latest

[Bill W (2)]

The panel have retired to the bar for their pre-dinner aperitifs.

[Bill W (2)]

Have now moved into restaurant.

Starters: Smoked Salmon
Oysters
Palma ham and melon

Washed down with a bottle of chablis

[Bill W (2)]

Moving liesurely onto main courses.

T Bone steak (rare)
Fillet steak (medium rare)
Sea Bass (line cought of course)

2 biottles Chateau Mouton Rothchild '86

[therobertsons]

ban reduced by a week what a joke

[Snorbins]

What time was the stilton taken out and allowed to rest? The port should be reaching the required ambient temperature!
Sorry I was thinking of the RFU not the international oiks!

[Tircoeds]

Was there a specific and considered reason for the one week reduction ?

[Bill W (2)]

Was there a specific and considered reason for the one week reduction ?

Not that I have seen Tircoeds - but I am sure there was.

CNOSF ruled against the Tincu bad on the basis of due process.

I think ERC may just have scored another own goal.

[Bill W (2)]

http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/5019_15072.php

[Bill W (2)]

Stade president Max Guazzini said: "It is a very heavy sanction. (Ferris) said there was no gouging. The fact Dupuy is French probably played a role."

Enter CNOSF stage left.

[g]

What is the point of this ban when he will get to play in the rest of Stades matches this season once csnof get their mucky claws involved.



Somebody needs to stand up to the French and counter act anything that CSNOF throw at them.


This means that every french player who gets a long ban will still end up playing because of loopholes its just a load of poop.

[Bill W (2)]

Easier said than done g. CNOSF has legal status in France. There is no UK equivalent.

[TigerAlex]

Was there a specific and considered reason for the one week reduction ?

I read that it was on a technicality; it had been admitted that the sanction was heavy to make an example of Dupuy to discourage others. That apparently meant that the sentence was unnecessarily long. So they reduced it by one week to satisfy the legal bit but to make sure he was still out for the rest of the season (in theory).

[Tircoeds]

Was there a specific and considered reason for the one week reduction ?

I read that it was on a technicality; it had been admitted that the sanction was heavy to make an example of Dupuy to discourage others. That apparently meant that the sentence was unnecessarily long. So they reduced it by one week to satisfy the legal bit but to make sure he was still out for the rest of the season (in theory).

Thanks Alex, can't quite get my head around that, admitting it was too long and reducing it by one week, think that may come back to bite them on the bum.

[cidermark]

Just saw this post on the Ulster forum ( http://www.uafc.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.p ... &sk=t&sd=a )

This reduction is excessive and anti Irish

(I presume it was said with tongue-in-cheek )

[Bill W (2)]

HHJ JB and ECR find themselves in something of a quandary.

Ferris says that it was Attoub who did the damage. Attoub says photgraphic evidence was "doctored".

If Attoub given significant ban then why too was Dupuy. Substance to "picking on the French"?

If Attoub not given significant ban then Ferris evidence discounted. So why Dupuy given significant ban? Substance to "picking on Dupuy"?

Either way route open for CNOSF to overturn bans (in France) simply on the basis of Ferris's evidence being treated differently by the "court" in the two hearings.