Bath centre Matt Banahan has been suspended for three weeks by the Rugby Football Union following his red card shown against Leicester.
The former England back was dimissed for a dangerous tackle on opposite number Anothony Allen during last Saturday's Aviva Premiership hit-out at Welford Road - won 17-12 by the Tigers.
He pleaded guilty to the charge and was handed a ban which prevents him from playing again until December 24.
The ban means he will be ruled him out of home and away Amlin Challenge Cup ties against Italian club Calvisano, plus a Premiership appointment with Saracens.
Meanwhile, Bath hooker Lee Mears received a two-week ban after he was cited for punching or striking an opponent in the same match.
Mears pleaded guilty to the charge and was also ordered to pay £500 towards hearing costs. He is free to play again on December 17.
Leicester forward Brett Deacon was given a one-week ban after receiving a red card for striking an opponent in the same contest, a charge he also admitted.
Deacon had already been given an internal suspension by his club but now has been banned by the RFU as well.
Comments
APV1 says...
@ tha_mai - yes, I think it is a big difference when the officials miss it and, as such, he is allowed to carry on playing. Certainly not his fault that it wasn't picked up, but it was his choice to commit the offence.
And stop with the "up-yourself English hypocricy" rubbish. You're starting to sound a little xenophobic and a hater of all things English. Previous posts would suggest otherwise, so don't get carried away.
I didn't call Hore a thug either. I said he had a brain fart on the pitch and at the time showed little remorse. But I didn't call him a thug.
He (and those from the Bath : Tigers match) committed acts of thuggery, perhaps. But that doesn't make them thugs.
So please don't put words into my mouth and tar me with the same brush you do others.
We don't have to agree, but I wasn't part of any lynch mob.
Posted 12:53 06th December 2012
ferdie says...
I too await 'the difference'.
In some eyes all these players would be 'thugs'.
Red cards and suspensions tend to do that.
Posted 11:09 06th December 2012
rugbylover says...
@APV1 Please explain the 'difference'.
Posted 07:51 06th December 2012
sukkadoits says...
from what I saw it was red at the absolute most but 3 weeks?
Posted 07:39 06th December 2012
tha_mai says...
there you go with your up-yourself English hypocricy again. It is 'completely differnet' when a non-English player offends.
Is it Hore's fault his offence was missed by the three blind men officiating? He too was dealt with fairly by the judiciary we love and respect.
So by your judgment then, these men would not qualify as 'thugs' the name thrown at any SH offenders?
As I said, make me laugh.
Posted 00:01 06th December 2012
APV1 says...
tha_mai - don't be a prat. All of these (Mears aside) were correctly picked up on the pitch and dealt with. There were 3 reds and two yellows in the match. Hore's incident was completely different.
Posted 12:00 05th December 2012
tha_mai says...
goodness! three English players get banned.
Should there not be multiple threads and dozens of England-hating rants, or does that only apply in special cases? Where have the Andrew Hore lynch mob got to, screaming hysterically for harsher penalties, all the while claiming the purity of UK play these days? Make me laugh.
Posted 09:46 05th December 2012