We value your privacy

We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data, such as unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalised ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights, as well as to develop and improve products.

With your permission we and our partners may use precise geolocation. You may click to consent to our and our partners’ processing as described above. Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing.

More Options

Thu 11 Apr 2013 | 03:41
Jerome Fillol banned for fourteen weeks for spitting at Peter Stringer

8
Comments

Stade Francais scrumhalf, Jerome Fillol, has been suspended for fourteen weeks following an independent Disciplinary Hearing in Dublin today arising from the Amlin Challenge Cup quarter-final match against Bath Rugby on Saturday.

Fillol was alleged to have committed an act contrary to good sportsmanship in that he spat at the Bath Rugby player, Peter Stringer (No 9), during the first half of the match at the Recreation Ground. The complaint was made by the match Citing Commissioner, Eugene Ryan (Ireland).

10.4(m) Acts contrary to good sportsmanship. A player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship in the enclosure.

Under the IRB Sanctions for Foul Play, Law 10.4(m), spitting at a player, carries the following sanction entry points: Low End: 4 weeks; Mid Range: 7 weeks; Top End: 11+ to 52 weeks.

The independent Judicial Officer, Anthony Davis (England), heard evidence and submissions from Fillol, who pleaded guilty, from the Stade Francais Paris secrétaire général, Cédric Boudarel, and from the club’s legal counsel. The Judicial Officer also heard submissions from ERC Disciplinary Officer, Roger O’Connor, and considered written evidence from Peter Stringer.

The Judicial officer found that Fillol had spat in the face of Stringer and that it had been an intentional, deliberate and grave act.

He determined that the act warranted a top-end entry point from the IRB’s Sanctions for spitting and considered that 26 weeks, from the available range of 11 to 52 weeks, was the appropriate entry point.

The Judicial Officer identified no aggravating factors, and after taking into account compelling mitigating factors, which included the genuine remorse expressed by the player at the hearing, as well as his exemplary record and strong character references, the Judicial Officer applied mitigation of 12 weeks, before imposing a sanction a 14 weeks.

The suspension will take into account the closed season and will therefore cover a 10-week period from 6 April to 16 June 2013 and a further four weeks from 15 July to 11 August 2013 in addition to the closed-season period.

Fillol is free to play on 12 August. Both the player and ERC have the right to appeal the decision.

Posted By: Grant Constable

8 Comments

  • eastcoastrugger
    11:37 PM 16/04/2013

    Did he really do it back in '99 too? Good memory mate

  • matt
    3:34 PM 14/04/2013

    I agree with everything you've said, this system is ridiculous.
    Buuuuut, he isnt actually banned during the off season. The ban stops once the international window stops. And restarts again when pre season begins.

  • drg
    12:41 PM 12/04/2013

    Just to add, I bet stringer wishes he had bashed the fook out of Fillol after that verdict... Maybe he'll ask Cudmore to have another word..

  • drg
    12:40 PM 12/04/2013

    This Genuine remorse bullshit really gets me. I have to admit I have felt genuinely bad about something illegal I've done on a rugby pitch when it lead to another player getting injured (albeit just bruised ribs) but so what right? I still did it. What happens with spear tackles etc, "intent" is not a factor, well then if intent doesn't count for shit then why would a guys feelings about it afterwards count???

    Guilty plea? Oh good boy, least you have enough brains not to deny what a truckload of cameras caught...so lets reduce your punishment??? FOR ADMITTING THE OBVIOUS??? I say guilty pleas shout get you exactly the punishment, and not guilty pleas (if subsequently found to be guilty) should get you the punishment AND MORE!

    Oh and just to add, no doubt they took into consideration his good conduct during the hearing, you know, like wearing a suit and saying yes sir no sir, and only speaking when spoken too...

    Aaaand, what's this BS about being banned in the off season? The guys gonna be "chillin out maxin, relaxin all cool" during his time off, doubt he gives a hoot if he's "banned from playing". It's like being kicked out of a bar and getting told your banned for 7 days and then being told they include the weekdays... Hooofookingraaaay...

    Not that 14 weeks is a breeze or anything...

  • danknapp
    1:11 AM 12/04/2013

    This "genuine remorse" thing is daft. I'd accept it if they had a word with the referee during the game to let him know that they should have been carded, THAT would be genuine remorse. Otherwise they just turn up at the hearing and say how sorry they were.

  • harry_mcmahon
    12:35 AM 12/04/2013

    Hmmm, they're all very good at showing, "Genuine remorse," at the disciplinary hearing, not so much at the time, or even after the match and tempers have cooled. No, instead he shows his remorse at a hearing days later, to determine his fate. Are the disciplinary officers so naive that they actually fall for this nonsense? Actually, that was a rhetorical question, as obviously they are.

    I think 14 weeks is a pittance for such a disgusting act.

  • browner
    8:47 PM 11/04/2013

    Cue the Pro coaches sending employees on 'acting classes' prior to hearings !

    Now lets hope the eye gouging offences get more 'appropriate' punishments in future

  • danknapp
    7:26 PM 11/04/2013

    "Genuine remorse."

    What a load of bullshit. Of course he's sorry that he's been banned. Just saying sorry and crying crocodile tears shouldn't count for anything. It certainly shouldn't get you time off your ban. He spat in a man's face for no good reason. As the judge said, there were no aggravating factors. Pathetic judgement.

Related Articles