1
Tom James lands suspension for striking during cup clash
By Grant Constable
Northampton’s Tom James has been handed a three-match ban for striking Ben White during a Champions Cup game against Toulon
The scrum-half, 30, was cited for hitting White with his head in the 70th minute of Saints’ 22-19 win last Friday.
James could have been handed a six-week suspension for the offence, but an independent disciplinary committee reduced the sanction following the player’s “acceptance of the charge and his clear disciplinary record”.
James, who joined Saints from Doncaster Knights in 2020, will be free to play again on January 8 – meaning he will be absent from his side’s Gallagher Premiership fixtures against Gloucester, Northampton and Exeter.
In other disciplinary news, Castres Olympique centre, Adrea Cocagi, was yesterday suspended for four weeks after he received a red card against Edinburgh Rugby at the Hive Stadium in round 2.
He was sent off for tackling full back Harry Paterson in a dangerous manner in contravention of Law 9.13.
Law 9.13 A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously.
Under World Rugby’s Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 9.13 carries the following sanction entry points - Low End: 2 weeks; Mid-range: 6 weeks; Top end: 10 to 52 weeks
An independent Disciplinary Committee upheld the red card decision, finding that in carrying out the tackle in a dangerous manner, Cocagi had made contact with Paterson’s head.
It then determined that the offending was at the mid-range of World Rugby’s sanctions and six weeks was selected as the appropriate entry point.
Due to his timely acceptance of the charge and his apology to Paterson, the committee decided to reduce the sanction by two weeks before imposing a four-week suspension.
- additional reporting from PA
Trending on RugbyPass
2
Ex-Scotland captain and British & Irish Lions star Laidlaw dies
3
Exeter Chiefs confirm latest Heaven sent arrival
4
Ex-Leicester Tigers CEO points out obvious choice for next head coach
5
Latest Comments
I wouldn’t think the risk is cash flow, as they have large cash reserves they said all through covid.
I suspect the author has it completely wrong as it pertains to the pool as well, because I can’t see the contracts of players changing year to year like revenue does.
I’d imagine there is an agreed principle to a ‘forecast’ figure of revenue for a cyclical period, and this is what 37% or whatever of is used for player salaries. So it would not change whatever that figure is until the next cycle. Cash flow, as you said, would be the main factor, but as they aren’t paid all it once, they’d not be hindered in this manor I don’t believe. Of all the references I’ve seen of a the player pool agreement, not once have I seen any detail on how the amount is determined.
But yes, that would be a very reasoned look at the consequences, especially compared those I’ve seen in articles on this site. Even with turnonver north of $350 million a year, 20 is still a sizeable chunk. Like this RA’s broadcast deal, they might have smaller sponsorship for a short period to align with everything else, then look to develop the deal further heading into the Lions tour cycle? Perhaps trying to take a deal from low to high like that is unlikely to a long term investor, and NZR want to get a good shortterm deal now so they can capitalize on growth for the Lions (i’m assuming that series has consequences on more than just broadcast deals right).
Go to commentsAnd a few Australians too ……
Go to comments