MrMouse
Bob Loudon (25)
I posit that due to a range of offences stretching back over many years, the SANZAR judicial system needs, once and for all, to be dumped.
What I would propose is:
1) A three or five man panel of regular judicial officers. These should for preference be ex-players or ex-referees, with some standing in the game and extensive knowledge of the laws of rugby (and where possible, the law).
2) Said panel should consist of individuals considered above reproach and admired for their fairness across all countries. Where possible, there should be a mix from each SANZAR country.
3) All offences under the laws must have a base value prescribed to them, and a standardised multiplier for severity. Eg 50 points for having a sock down, with multipliers of 1.5x for multiple socks and 1.5x for prior offences. A player with two socks down and a previous related offence would accrue 112.5 points, ie a one game suspension.
4) Multipliers for prior offences should work something like: 2x for same season, 1.5x for previous season, 1.25x for two seasons ago and no additional penalty for 3 or more years ago.
5) Given that, at present, players, coaches and officials are not required to be present for hearings, and given the great distances covered by SANZAR, conference call hearings are accepted practice.
Feel free to add your own thoughts/perspectives on this. Is there anyone who thinks that the current judicial process is accurate, fair or consistent?
What I would propose is:
1) A three or five man panel of regular judicial officers. These should for preference be ex-players or ex-referees, with some standing in the game and extensive knowledge of the laws of rugby (and where possible, the law).
2) Said panel should consist of individuals considered above reproach and admired for their fairness across all countries. Where possible, there should be a mix from each SANZAR country.
3) All offences under the laws must have a base value prescribed to them, and a standardised multiplier for severity. Eg 50 points for having a sock down, with multipliers of 1.5x for multiple socks and 1.5x for prior offences. A player with two socks down and a previous related offence would accrue 112.5 points, ie a one game suspension.
4) Multipliers for prior offences should work something like: 2x for same season, 1.5x for previous season, 1.25x for two seasons ago and no additional penalty for 3 or more years ago.
5) Given that, at present, players, coaches and officials are not required to be present for hearings, and given the great distances covered by SANZAR, conference call hearings are accepted practice.
Feel free to add your own thoughts/perspectives on this. Is there anyone who thinks that the current judicial process is accurate, fair or consistent?
