Cheslin and Rollins Banned

By Dave Picken - November 7 2012
Cheslin and Rollins Banned
Cheslin
Both Andrew Cheslin and Andrew Rollins have been handed lengthy bans after  being found guilty of making contact with the same player's eyes in the game at Chester on September 8th. West are considering an appeal in  the case of Rollins.

 

Both players denied the respective offences after being cited by Chester. Cheslin received a nine week ban and Rollins received 13 weeks.

The Cheslin incident occurred almost sixteen minutes into the game when he went across to tackle Chester No 6 Llion Jones. The Chester player cut inside and, after a brief collision with Cheslin, was brought down by other West players. He was uninjured  and the game continued normally. However, Chester produced a still photograph taken by a professional, which showed Cheslin's right hand in the player's face.

The Chairman of the panel, which met at Brighouse, told Cheslin that he was extremely unlucky that the photograph had been taken at that instant. The panel acknowledged there had been no intent and no physical injury to the Chester player, but Cheslin had been reckless in making contact with the eye area.

The same Chester player was injured in the 27th minute when a maul formed following  a line-out. Chester produced a video which showed Andrew Rollins on the opposite side of the maul to the injured player with his left arm out of sight.

West argued that it would have been physically impossible for him to reach across as far as the injured player, and the most probable cause of his injury was from a fellow Chester player who could be seen trying to bind.

The club is awaiting receipt of the formal judgement before deciding whether to go ahead with the appeal on behalf of Rollins.

 
Cheslin and Rollins Banned
Posted by: Official West Hartlepool RFC (IP Logged)
Date: 07/11/2012 10:54


Re: Cheslin and Rollins Banned
Posted by: West Park Allotment (IP Logged)
Date: 07/11/2012 11:39

Staggered by this to be honest.
I have not seen any evidence, of course, however the point I would make is that in any game of rugby there are numerous instances where "contact" is made with the eyes and 99.9% of it will be unintentional and without any injury whatsoever.
I have noticed the increase in the number of photographers patrolling our touchlines in recent seasons. Judging by the length of their lenses I suspect they take good photos.
Can I suggest we trawl back through their albums and get half of the opposition teams banned, and then we won't have any games to watch and can all go Christmas shopping on a Saturday afternoon instead.

Re: Cheslin and Rollins Banned
Posted by: Carlo03 (IP Logged)
Date: 07/11/2012 12:13

Unbelievable! How do they arrive at these lengthy bans using the percentage of probability, especially when there was no reaction from player or ref during the game. As wpa stated, most of these incidents are accidental or in Rollos case non existent. Manu tualagi got 5 weeks for deliberately punching Chris Ashton's lights out!!! If you use the percentages of probability the how about this; 1 player having deliberate 'contact' with his eyes, in 1 game by two different opponents and not one person on the pitch mentioning anything until after the game!! 5% probable would be somewhere near.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2012 12:30 by davepicken.

Re: Cheslin and Rollins Banned
Posted by: Young Nogger (IP Logged)
Date: 07/11/2012 12:55

I can’t see how these bans can be justified. A still photo would not show any intent, it simply captures one single moment in time, and it sounds more likely that Cheslin was grasping at the player after he had stepped back inside. I've seen people banned for 3 weeks after head butting and 5 weeks for deliberately eye gouging in front of a referee, I don’t understand how or why a 9 or 12 week ban can be justified for a non deliberate act. For me this is a no brainer, it has to be appealed.

Re: Cheslin and Rollins Banned
Posted by: Dave Picken (IP Logged)
Date: 07/11/2012 13:03

Point of clarity. The entry point for an offence of making contact with the eye or eye area is actually 18 weeks so both of these judgements should be put in that context.

Goto Thread: PreviousNext
Goto: Message ListLog In

This Thread has been closed
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net