POLL: Does Nick Wood deserve a ban for stamping?

wood
Nick Wood was sent off under two minutes into Sunday’s Saracens v Gloucester game for stamping on the head of Jacques Burger. His disciplinary hearing is set for this Wednesday – you can view the incident in the first 30 seconds of the video below:

Since the game many players, including Burger himself, have come out and said that Wood is not a dirty player and would never have meant to stamp on him. That said, the top end of bans for this sort of thing range from nine weeks up to a maximum of 52. Do you think Wood deserves to be banned? If so, for how long? Vote in the poll and leave your justification in the comments section below.

POLL: Does Nick Wood deserve to be banned?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

13 thoughts on “POLL: Does Nick Wood deserve a ban for stamping?

  1. His record and attitude means he doesn’t deserve a long ban. He was wrong, he has admitted than, I can’t imagine he will do it again. BUT, he still needs a ban of some sort. You can’t stamp on someones head. 2 weeks is enough.

  2. Agree with Jacob here. He’s already apologised and showed real remorse and immediate regret for his actions. 2 weeks is enough.

  3. Stamp is a stamp, there was intent, and he has to take responsibility for that

    i wouldn’t get off with a slapped wrist if i got into a fight in the street due to good previous behaviour.

    don’t get me wrong nick wood is a great asset to glos but the rules are plain and simple, i wouldn’t expect someone to stamp on my face in my league, it shows a lack of respect for the game we all love!

  4. Looks like a top end offence to me, then maybe the usual couple of weeks deduction for prior conduct and genuine remorse.

  5. Top end ban for me as it was only into the first few minutes of the match, this is not to excuse it later on but it was petulent, violent act that needs to attract the full force of the laws regardless of any remose shown.

  6. I have to say top end ban too. 2 weeks as suggested further up is a minimum ban for stamping. The committee will have to consider the following
    – Where he stamped – low end bans are for rucking in the body. Rucking hands wrists and ankles which are more prone to serious damage carries a heavier ban and rucking the head and face is top end
    – Wood was looking down and therefore knew what he was doing
    – The ball was available therefore there is no excuse for stamping in the first place. The fact that it was a flurry of stamps makes it worse
    – The timing in the game – this was after 73 seconds. If he does this that early in a game, how is he going to react 73 minutes in when his team are desperate?
    – The image of the sport. We all know it’s an aggressive physical sport, but the RFU and IRB are desperate to maintain the image of an otherwise gentlemanly game. As well as his stand alone offence, it will be considered to be bringing the game into disrepute.
    – His remorse. It was evident from the way he sulked on the touchline that he instantly regretted the incident. He’ll likely get some time off.

    However, I think the start of this ban is going to be high end. He’s only got 5 yellow cards and no other reds in 10 years in the Premiership which will help his cause, but this was a pretty bad offence.

  7. Doesn’t seem that much different to the stamp by Adam Thomson on Ally Strokosch last year and he got two weeks (increased to three), I think? Not saying Wood should only get two weeks but they need to start having consistency with decisions.

    1. Max, watch the Thomson one again. 1:10 into the clip

      http://www.rugbydump.com/2012/11/2842/all-black-adam-thomsons-boot-on-alasdair-strokoschs-head

      It’s reckless contact with the head, but it’s not a stamp like Wood’s was. There was serious force from Wood and no raking motion. Although I thought Thomson’s was a mid level and he was let off too lightly the two are not comparable.

      If this isn’t top level then how hard do you have to stamp on someone’s head to get a top level ban? 9 weeks is the entry point for top level offences. Everything seems to get reduced for ‘genuine remorse’ and with his prior good conduct I can see him walking away with a 7 week ban (and should consider himself fortunate if this is the case)

  8. I think Thomson’s ban was under the consideration that the contact was minimal and it was reckless rather than malicious. I suspect that they possibly also considered the fact that Strokosch was wearing a scrum cap, which I find dubious. Frankly, the ban he ended up with of 2 weeks was a bit of a joke frankly, should have at least gone with 8 weeks reduced to 4 for good record etc.

    The two incidents are quite different though. Thomson reasonably gently tapped someone on the back of the head with his boot when the ball was trapped in a ruck under pressure deeper into the game.
    Wood aggressively stamped multiple times into the body and head when the ball was already available. Also, Strokosch’s response didn’t imply that he was hurt in the incident where Burger’s response was to hold his head and bleed everywhere. The attention that the incident has gotten will really not help either

  9. Top end ban and preferably longer.

    It seems clear that he looked directly at Burger before stamping his boot down on his head.

    There’s no excuse for this at any point during a game but multiple, seemingly deliberate stamps with only 73 seconds gone on the clock is an act of sheer thuggishness,

    I cannot see any possible justification for the act nor any reason to mitigate what should be a very long ban, regardless of his previous record or any remorse he may feel.

    The only way to remove actions like this from the game is to hand out lengthy, painful bans that make players fully aware of the consequences of their actions.

    The hearings seem far too eager to accept any form of flimsy justification for acts like this, (witness Horwill) and when they do act, the punishments are far too lenient (witness Thomson or Hore)

  10. Have to say that the sending off ruined Gloster’s day. However much as I like him anything like this needs a longer ban than 2 weeks. Just can’t have it. I moaned when Healy was let off lightly and that was the leg. Painful for Glos but there it is.

  11. I’ve only seen the incident once and so I could be wrong, but its difficult to believe he was aiming for the ball!! It’s dangerous, thuggish and unsporting behaviour and the cynic in me wonders whether his contrition was about being caught and letting his team down rather than genuine remorse over injuring another player. 73 seconds in – as a professional, hardly at the end of his tether – So I support a lengthy ban. I agree with other comments that just because I haven’t gunned someone down in the past shouldn’t mean i’m treated more leniently when I do!

Comments are closed.