RugbyRebels

I can't find a thread on this elsewhere, surely there must be, but hey; this is the right place for it.



He's denying the charges though

Rugby Dump says the maximum is 208 weeks - that's what he should be looking at, and counting himself lucky it's not life.

WTF was going through his head? It is about as obvious as it gets, how in gods name is he denying the charges. Very long ban warranted for that.

He claims his fists was closed and that he was going for the ball.
He also claims he wasn't aware of the situation before the end of the game when his team mates asked him "wtf he was thinking".
Battle himself says he didn't notice it at the time (euphory of Scoring) but that he woke up with a very sore eye.

His fist does look to have been closed - which of course, makes no difference. The offence is "contact with the eye or eye area" not "gouging"

Which Tyler wrote:His fist does look to have been closed - which of course, makes no difference. The offence is "contact with the eye or eye area" not "gouging"

It will be used to justify or un-justify his intentions.

Id say his intentions were pretty clear and had hee haw to do with the ball

Donny osmond wrote:Id say his intentions were pretty clear and had hee haw to do with the ball

Not denying that.

Anyway lucky he his being judged by a French committee.

14 weeks is light IMO.

Adder wrote:He claims his fists was closed and that he was going for the ball.

Why would you go for the ball with closed fists?!?!?!