Citings - So how long will Joe be on extended leave then?

[Scrumhead]

Well he was always going to be made an example of and TBH, it’s entirely his own fault. I’m a big fan, but he’s let himself, England and even more so Quins down a few too many times now. He needs to learn from this.

[Epaminondas Pules]

The whole citings lottery is really pissing me off. Nailed on punch to the face - 3 weeks. High tackle on dipping player - 4 weeks. High tackle on upright player - nothing. Irish clearouts - nothing. Stamp on the head - 3 weeks.

[Scrumhead]

100%. Marler was an idiot, but how can they possibly justify banning him for more than 3x as long as a genuine act of intentional violence?

[Galfon]

Seems odd, a gentle tickle out of play with no threat of injury is 2.5 x more serious than a thudding tackle to the head with high risk of injury.Stander repeatedly skelping Faz in the face is ok, plus the other listed above are less serious.The 12 week entry sanction for grabbing/squeezing etc. is surely there for close quarter dealings to deliver pain and competitive advantage..
He was a tw@t though, and the last thing we need is an onrush of tea-baggings, dry-humpings, wedgies and the like whilst families are watching, in this sensitive age.
He's too useful a player to lose over sh!t like this.

[Mikey Brown]

Jesus. Both those seem harsh given Peter O'Mahoney is still free to run around being Peter O'Mahoney without sanction.

[Cameo]

I think he needed a ban but would have happily swapped his and Tuilagi's around. Marler's was stupid, immature and needs to be discouraged. Tuilagi's was plain reckless.

I know it is not an official factor but I do think what punishment they have faced on the day might influence things.

The punch to the face is bad but was dealt with effectively at the time and, arguably, cost his team the game. Marler now faces a ban but got away with not leaving his team in trouble. Tuilagi was somewhere in between in that he got sent off but there wasn't much time left.

All these bans could be a bit of a joke anyway if games are called off.

[Banquo]

Comedic all round

[Beasties]

Just fucking ridiculous frankly.

[fivepointer]

Its the inconsistencies that grate.
I can understand they wanted to make an example of Marler, and he did act like an idiot, but 10 weeks seems disproportionate and excessive.
Meanwhile others who have committed acts that should have seen a red card get off without any sanction.

[Oakboy]

Now, Jones has only been reprimanded for his 'rubbish decision' and 'playing against 16' remarks about the ref. That might be a dodgy precedent.

[Digby]

The entry point for the length of the ban is 12 weeks for Marker grabbing genitalia, it doesn't really contain a footnote it needs only start at 3-4 weeks for a piece of humour that would be recognised by a Mike Reid or Roy Chubby Brown

[Big D]

The entry point for the length of the ban is 12 weeks for Marler grabbing genitalia, it doesn't really contain a footnote it needs only start at 3-4 weeks for a piece of humour that would be recognised by a Mike Reid or Roy Chubby Brown

Exactly this.

Once he was cited the panel had nowhere else to go with it. 12 weeks is the low end, they knocked some off for remorse etc despite the post on social media about bollocks and added a bit back on.

Not sure what they were supposed to do.

[Stom]

The entry point for the length of the ban is 12 weeks for Marler grabbing genitalia, it doesn't really contain a footnote it needs only start at 3-4 weeks for a piece of humour that would be recognised by a Mike Reid or Roy Chubby Brown

Exactly this.

Once he was cited the panel had nowhere else to go with it. 12 weeks is the low end, they knocked some off for remorse etc despite the post on social media about bollocks and added a bit back on.

Not sure what they were supposed to do.

Well indeed, it's not the biscuit eaters that are the problem, it's the regs!

They should be absolutely clear. Fly in off your feet in a ruck directly into another player as they're unprotected, and you get 12 weeks off.

The entire SA and Ireland teams would be on permanent holiday.

[Digby]

The entry point for the length of the ban is 12 weeks for Marler grabbing genitalia, it doesn't really contain a footnote it needs only start at 3-4 weeks for a piece of humour that would be recognised by a Mike Reid or Roy Chubby Brown

Exactly this.

Once he was cited the panel had nowhere else to go with it. 12 weeks is the low end, they knocked some off for remorse etc despite the post on social media about bollocks and added a bit back on.

Not sure what they were supposed to do.

I would say it's a bad look for the game this is being addressed so much more seriously than serious violence, but in truth it does't make the disciplinary process anymore of a joke

[switchskier]

The entry point for the length of the ban is 12 weeks for Marler grabbing genitalia, it doesn't really contain a footnote it needs only start at 3-4 weeks for a piece of humour that would be recognised by a Mike Reid or Roy Chubby Brown

Exactly this.

Once he was cited the panel had nowhere else to go with it. 12 weeks is the low end, they knocked some off for remorse etc despite the post on social media about bollocks and added a bit back on.

Not sure what they were supposed to do.

Well indeed, it's not the biscuit eaters that are the problem, it's the regs!

They should be absolutely clear. Fly in off your feet in a ruck directly into another player as they're unprotected, and you get 12 weeks off.

The entire SA and Ireland teams would be on permanent holiday.

Start actually citing and banning them for it and it will soon stop though (or at least decrease significantly). For me the issue is not that Marler got ten weeks, but that serious foul play gets so much less (and that players get banned for weeks rather than a number of games).

[Stom]

Exactly this.

Once he was cited the panel had nowhere else to go with it. 12 weeks is the low end, they knocked some off for remorse etc despite the post on social media about bollocks and added a bit back on.

Not sure what they were supposed to do.

Well indeed, it's not the biscuit eaters that are the problem, it's the regs!

They should be absolutely clear. Fly in off your feet in a ruck directly into another player as they're unprotected, and you get 12 weeks off.

The entire SA and Ireland teams would be on permanent holiday.

Start actually citing and banning them for it and it will soon stop though (or at least decrease significantly). For me the issue is not that Marler got ten weeks, but that serious foul play gets so much less (and that players get banned for weeks rather than a number of games).

Me, too. It's not the length of Marler's ban, it's the lack of ban for actual dangerous play.

[Mellsblue]

Well indeed, it's not the biscuit eaters that are the problem, it's the regs!

They should be absolutely clear. Fly in off your feet in a ruck directly into another player as they're unprotected, and you get 12 weeks off.

The entire SA and Ireland teams would be on permanent holiday.

Start actually citing and banning them for it and it will soon stop though (or at least decrease significantly). For me the issue is not that Marler got ten weeks, but that serious foul play gets so much less (and that players get banned for weeks rather than a number of games).

Me, too. It's not the length of Marler's ban, it's the lack of ban for actual dangerous play.

Yep, though I do think 10 weeks is ridiculous. For all those saying that it’s about the game’s image. I’m sure the average parent is more worried about their kid getting a haymaker to the face than a quick cupping of the genitalia.

[Stom]

Start actually citing and banning them for it and it will soon stop though (or at least decrease significantly). For me the issue is not that Marler got ten weeks, but that serious foul play gets so much less (and that players get banned for weeks rather than a number of games).

Me, too. It's not the length of Marler's ban, it's the lack of ban for actual dangerous play.

Yep, though I do think 10 weeks is ridiculous. For all those saying that it’s about the game’s image. I’m sure the average parent is more worried about their kid getting a haymaker to the face than a quick cupping of the genitalia.

The average parent doesn't talk about it to the newspapers...

[belgarion]

All bans are for ACTIVE weeks of playing so if season is suspended so are the sentences. So that means if Prem Rugby suspend the season today then Marlers ban will be as well & will restart when the season/playing does

[morepork]

Start actually citing and banning them for it and it will soon stop though (or at least decrease significantly). For me the issue is not that Marler got ten weeks, but that serious foul play gets so much less (and that players get banned for weeks rather than a number of games).

Me, too. It's not the length of Marler's ban, it's the lack of ban for actual dangerous play.

Yep, though I do think 10 weeks is ridiculous. For all those saying that it’s about the game’s image. I’m sure the average parent is more worried about their kid getting a haymaker to the face than a quick cupping of the genitalia.

He grabbed his joint and gave it a good twist.

[p/d]

He is a tw$t and deserved 10 weeks.

Pleased Lawes got nowt

[Scrumhead]

Me, too. It's not the length of Marler's ban, it's the lack of ban for actual dangerous play.

Yep, though I do think 10 weeks is ridiculous. For all those saying that it’s about the game’s image. I’m sure the average parent is more worried about their kid getting a haymaker to the face than a quick cupping of the genitalia.

He grabbed his joint and gave it a good twist.

No he didn’t ... a little bit of cupping and that’s about it. It was a fu%king dumb move and I don’t defend it, but let’s not start pretending it had any element of violence to it.

[Spiffy]

Yep, though I do think 10 weeks is ridiculous. For all those saying that it’s about the game’s image. I’m sure the average parent is more worried about their kid getting a haymaker to the face than a quick cupping of the genitalia.

He grabbed his joint and gave it a good twist.

No he didn’t ... a little bit of cupping and that’s about it. It was a fu%king dumb move and I don’t defend it, but let’s not start pretending it had any element of violence to it.

I don't think anyone is really claiming any violence about it. And it is not about violence in any case. It's all about handling the genitals. It's a no-no, just as it is in real life. You can't walk up to someone in the street and fondle his or her private parts, claiming it's just for a bit of a joke, and expect to get away with it. Marler is thick as a plank to do this in an international game in full view of millions. Hopefully the sentence will deter others of a similar bent (no pun intended.)

[Digby]

He grabbed his joint and gave it a good twist.

No he didn’t ... a little bit of cupping and that’s about it. It was a fu%king dumb move and I don’t defend it, but let’s not start pretending it had any element of violence to it.

I don't think anyone is really claiming any violence about it. And it is not about violence in any case. It's all about handling the genitals. It's a no-no, just as it is in real life. You can't walk up to someone in the street and fondle his or her private parts, claiming it's just for a bit of a joke, and expect to get away with it. Marler is thick as a plank to do this in an international game in full view of millions. Hopefully the sentence will deter others of a similar bent (no pun intended.)

Okay, but if it's about what you can do on the street then AWJ has his forearm/elbow in the throat of Marler, and I suspect on the street that's called assault, so if it's about the street oh Huggy Bear then more bans are needed

[Spiffy]

No he didn’t ... a little bit of cupping and that’s about it. It was a fu%king dumb move and I don’t defend it, but let’s not start pretending it had any element of violence to it.

I don't think anyone is really claiming any violence about it. And it is not about violence in any case. It's all about handling the genitals. It's a no-no, just as it is in real life. You can't walk up to someone in the street and fondle his or her private parts, claiming it's just for a bit of a joke, and expect to get away with it. Marler is thick as a plank to do this in an international game in full view of millions. Hopefully the sentence will deter others of a similar bent (no pun intended.)

Okay, but if it's about what you can do on the street then AWJ has his forearm/elbow in the throat of Marler, and I suspect on the street that's called assault, so if it's about the street oh Huggy Bear then more bans are needed

Point taken. But I think society has placed the genitals in a separate, no-go area, whether we like it or not. Giving a bloke a shove is not the same, physiologically or psychologically, as grabbing his tackle. I speak as one who has been both thumped and sac grabbed on the field more than once. The former did not phase me too much but the latter totally boiled my piss (as was probably intended.) Most players I knew felt the same way.