Filed under: Rugby Union, Premiership, England Rugby
Mark Cueto is a lucky man. The Sale Sharks and England winger has been handed a nine-week ban for eye-gouging, which is only half of what he would have expected to get.The fact he will sit out nine weeks rather than the standard 18-week suspension for making contact with the eye or eye area means he will be available for the World Cup, as his ban ends on June 7, just before England's first warm-up match.
The RFU prides itself on coming down hard without fear or favour on eye-gougers. Northampton's Dylan Hartley missed the last World Cup because he was spending a 26-week stint on the sidelines for a similar offence to Cueto's.
So why does the winger seemingly get preferential treatment?
First of all, the incident, during Sale's 53-24 Premiership defeat to Northampton, did not result in any serious injury to Christian Day, the Saints second-rower who copped the gouge.
And secondly, the RFU figured Cueto had been provoked - namely Day had steamed in off the ball and delivered a knee to the Sale man's kidneys, which resulted in a retaliatory couple of punches before the eye-gouging - as can be seen in this video.
The RFU said at Monday's citing hearing that Cueto pleaded guilty to the charge, adding: "The panel decided this was a mid-entry offence, which attracts a ban of 18 weeks, but because of the player's compelling mitigation he received the full 50 per cent discount."
If rugby's governing body wants to point to mitigating circumstances in reducing lengths of bans, it could start a dangerous precedent. Where do you draw the line when players claim they were provoked? Three punches previously in an off-the-ball dust up? A stray boot in a maul five minutes ago?
Or could a player claim they were the victim judicious squeeze of something tender in a ruck the previous half and therefore, M'Lud, they were merely setting the record straight? An eye for an eye, if you'll pardon the pun.
Cueto will be pleased the RFU took into account Day's actions before his offence, because otherwise he would have had to watch the World Cup at dawn like the rest of England, rather than actually being involved.
But we must hope that this ruling is not the start of a raft of reduced bans because of so-called "mitigating circumstances".
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
Carlos Puyol Carlos Tevez Cesc Fabregas Charley Hoffman Clarence Seedorf
No comments:
Post a Comment