Guy Porter red card - Update - 3 week ban

[Noggs]

It is what it is and we will move on.

I would have thought that where there is head contact the medics will always check the player.

[Rugbygramps]

Porter comes into contact with a player who isn’t carrying the ball. That is the foul play.

The speed in which Porter is moving forward is the recklessness and also creates the force which was the reason for the red card.

As commented above I think the red was harsh and the ban is ridiculous but they are trying to change players behaviours.

The issue for me Schof, welcome by the way, is that it was dealt with in the laws of the game, protocols were followed, the ref didn’t just make something up.
Of course there are good and bad refs, I thought this one was pretty good, and they all make mistakes, but given the nature of the incident and the injuries sustained by Lee, it was probably the right call. Had they collided chest on chest and bounced off each other completely different call

[wigworth]

Given that Porter did not accept the red card decision in the hearing I wonder if an appeal might be coming as well.

[Rugbygramps]

Given that Porter did not accept the red card decision in the hearing I wonder if an appeal might be coming as well.

Risks an increase if he does though I think

[Schof1990]

Thanks rugbygramps.

I agree. I was just trying to explain that there definitely is foul play. I know that when giving bans they have to follow guide lines but I was expecting a shorter ban.

[wigworth]

Given that Porter did not accept the red card decision in the hearing I wonder if an appeal might be coming as well.

Risks an increase if he does though I think

I see nothing written about that.

[Knightonian]

Surely in denying the offence he has already appealed it and they have decided it is an offence

If they were going to overturn that was the most likely time

[Tigerbeat]

Surely in denying the offence he has already appealed it and they have decided it is an offence

If they were going to overturn that was the most likely time

In the eyes of that disciplinary panel...........would be a new panel if it were to go to appeal.

[TigerFeetSteve]

Given that Porter did not accept the red card decision in the hearing I wonder if an appeal might be coming as well.

Risks an increase if he does though I think

I see nothing written about that.

Any appeal can change the sentence, both up and down. Currently Porter has the minimum possible ban for the offence, so the only improvement would be a complete dismissal. The club will have trained for him not to be there this week so doubtful he'd be in the 23 given our depth doesn't make him an automatic slot back into the team like say Genge becoming available at short notice, so essentially it's risk an increase in ban for a one game ban.

[jgriffin]

Surely in denying the offence he has already appealed it and they have decided it is an offence

If they were going to overturn that was the most likely time

In the eyes of that disciplinary panel...........would be a new panel if it were to go to appeal.

In the context of the Gibson Park decision, ludicrous.

[wigworth]

Surely in denying the offence he has already appealed it and they have decided it is an offence

If they were going to overturn that was the most likely time

In the appeals process the case is heard by a different set of people to the first hearing, however for them to hear the case again one of the two conditions have to be met "prove that the Judicial Officer/Disciplinary Committee’s decision was in error in fact or law, should be overturned in the interests of justice or that the sanction was manifestly excessive, wrong in principle or unduly lenient.". So he could appeal and they refuse the case as they believe neither condition has been met.

I was just surprised he didn't roll over and accept the red card decision, which would indicate he believes it was an accident and not reckless.

[wigworth]

Risks an increase if he does though I think

I see nothing written about that.

Any appeal can change the sentence, both up and down. Currently Porter has the minimum possible ban for the offence, so the only improvement would be a complete dismissal. The club will have trained for him not to be there this week so doubtful he'd be in the 23 given our depth doesn't make him an automatic slot back into the team like say Genge becoming available at short notice, so essentially it's risk an increase in ban for a one game ban.

Could you link me to this please I have been looking for something concreate about this.

[Scott1]

Surely in denying the offence he has already appealed it and they have decided it is an offence

If they were going to overturn that was the most likely time

In the appeals process the case is heard by a different set of people to the first hearing, however for them to hear the case again one of the two conditions have to be met "prove that the Judicial Officer/Disciplinary Committee’s decision was in error in fact or law, should be overturned in the interests of justice or that the sanction was manifestly excessive, wrong in principle or unduly lenient.". So he could appeal and they refuse the case as they believe nether condition has been met.

I was just surprised he didn't roll over and accept the red card decision, which would indicate he believes it was an accident and not reckless.

It was an accident and it wasn’t reckless. Good for him! I would’ve done the same,even at the possibility of having the ban extended (if that is the case). You have to make a stand,you wouldn’t plead guilty in court for something you was innocent of would you? I admire the fibre of his fabric!

[TigerFeetSteve]

I see nothing written about that.

Any appeal can change the sentence, both up and down. Currently Porter has the minimum possible ban for the offence, so the only improvement would be a complete dismissal. The club will have trained for him not to be there this week so doubtful he'd be in the 23 given our depth doesn't make him an automatic slot back into the team like say Genge becoming available at short notice, so essentially it's risk an increase in ban for a one game ban.

Could you link me to this please I have been looking for something concreate about this.

It states that both parties are able to appeal (Porter and the EPCR) and new hearing therefore is able to impose any level of penalty both up and down. All appeals have to have the ability to resentence in both directions otherwise it completely undermines their authority.

Personally I think the fact you can now contest a charge in a hearing yet still get full mitigation is a good thing, it avoids people just pleading guilty to avoind the 6 week ban with no reduction.

[Tigers86asw]

Porter comes into contact with a player who isn’t carrying the ball. That is the foul play.

The speed in which Porter is moving forward is the recklessness and also creates the force which was the reason for the red card.

As commented above I think the red was harsh and the ban is ridiculous but they are trying to change players behaviours.

I agree with most of this but I don’t see how Porter can change his behaviour as he didn’t see him- he wasn’t trying to tackle him, he just ran into someone who he didn’t know was there.

The 3 week back for an accident- what a joke.