Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the n/a site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Saints ace Best loses RFU appeal



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 06 October 2008
Neil Best's appeal against his 18-week ban was tonight dismissed by the RFU.
The Northampton Saints forward had asked for the ban for eye-gouging to be reduced when he appeared before a three-man appeal panel in London.

But although the original RFU disciplinary hearing accepted the incident with London Wasps' James Haskell was purely accidental, the appeal panel decided after a one-and-half hour meeting that the original punishment should stand.

Best had put his finger in Haskell's eye as he tried to haul the England star out of a ruck by his scrum cap.

Earlier, Saints boss Jim Mallinder has expressed his disappointment at former England prop Jeff Probyn, who sat on the panel that dished out Best's punishment, saying the club were taking a 'dangerous path' in appealing.

Speaking after Saints' 30-17 bonus-point win in their opening EDF Energy Cup game against Bristol, Mallinder said: "It is just disappointing to see people comment on what has happened."

Tonight's decision means Saints won't have Best available until January 28.

The full article contains 182 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 07 October 2008 9:02 AM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Northampton
 
Prev
1
Next
1

desktop,

07/10/2008 08:12:36
Do I want an eye-gouger representing the Saints ?
Will eye-gouging encourage children to take up Rugby ?
No and No again. I know it's an investment by the Saints but they should sack him or at least give an assurance that he is not being paid during his suspension.
The game comes first.
2

hjitb,

MK 07/10/2008 08:39:41
Good point, but
Do we want people that head butt in the game ?
Will people take up rugby if they think they will be head butted ?
No. Haskell deliberately head butts another player in the ruck, his ban ??

1 Week !!

Consistent ?
3

Willfromthornby,

07/10/2008 08:48:05
desktop - everybody has admitted it was accidental. He is a quality player and I would rather have him and my team stay up in the league. Pathetic!

4

rugbygirl,

Northampton 07/10/2008 14:42:34
Rugby is a physical game, and bumps, grazes and scratches are all are expected. However violence should not be tolerated and in my opinion a headbut is a premeditated and vindictive move. However grabbing someone by the scrum cap; although maybe misjudged, is not either of these. Therefore the bans to do not seem to follow any logical guidelines. It seems, again, that a Saints player has been hurt more by the vindictiveness of others (i.e the "panel")than the situation itself.
Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.