Thelonius wrote:Well if he went in with Lowes, Lowes was probably leaning back on the two legs of his chair with feet on the table explaining how it's not about him and it's easy at the top.

keithcun wrote:This is another part that interests me. Surely, from the clubs point of view they should have gone in and pleaded not guilty to this charge and admitted guilt to the lesser charge, ie, the one that Fakir was given, a Grade C offence.

Surely he hasn't gone in, with representatives, and pleaded guilty to intentionally smacking the bloke in the face. If that's the case, then questions need to be asked about the players representatives.

keithcun wrote:But surely intent is very hard to prove and I see that's the only difference between the Grade C and D.

getdownmonkeyman wrote:Maybe they were given the nod to plead guilty and get five, plead not guilty and get six on a rejected appeal?

Wires71 wrote:Doubt it. He was charged as Grade D which carries the tariff of 3-5 match ban, he got the maximum they could give him for that offence.

Wires71 wrote:Doubt it. He was charged as Grade D which carries the tariff of 3-5 match ban, he got the maximum they could give him for that offence.

Dave T wrote:3-5 is the normal punishment for this offence. If a players past record is bad, then the committee are guided to increase the ban length.