Who (nationality) actually sets the punishment for sited infringments in the Tri Nations?

Question

I know Brad Thorn had to meet with the SANZAR judiciary regarding the supposed "spear tackle" on John Smit, but is the judiciary made up of NZers, considering that it was in NZ?

I am asking this in regards to the accusations by Smit that the All Blacks get special treatment - besides the fact that Thorn was lucky that he wasn't sent off.

Answer 1

It was an Australian,but it wouldn`t matter if it was Jon Smit that chose the penalty , they would still be bleating.

South African Rugby is a dead duck and and was always going to be once  they started selecting teams and management on race, rather than ability.

It`s rather sad that a once proud & wonderful Rugby nation is headed down the drain, because of polititical interference.

Answer 2

As I understand it at each test there is a citings officer appointed who reviews the match and refers incidents to the judiciary.  The officials from the teams involved and members of the public can also lay complaints over incidents.  Each country has its own independent judiciary panel, usually headed by an independent lawyer or judge.  All complaints are heard by the judiciary panel of the host country.  So all incidents in NZ (regardless of the nationality of the person the complaint is about) are heard by the NZ judiciary, all incidents in SA by the SA judiciary panel and so on.

Answer 3

i dono the answer, but thorn got off sooooo lucky, schalk burger at first recieved a 6 week ban, whcih was shortened to 2 weeks, in the rugby world cup for a far less dangerous tackle..... its extermely unfair, especially when stuat dickensen says he couldn't see properly, howvever tv replays show him in clear sight of the incident and shrugging his shoulders at putting his hands up when john smit appeeld once on the floor

Answer 4

Each of the National Unions set the punishment.  It is not set by SANZAR.

I wouldn't worry too much about the SAF's complaints they are assertions.  Thorn was wrong and got a week. About right.  Wait for the next time some body gets bitten or gouged in SA. See what the punishment will be?

Answer 5

I think the decision on the punishment for Thorn was actually made by an Australian SANZAR judicial officer. And being SANZAR there would be influences from all three nations, not just the home nation. As for the punishment, well it gives the South Africans more of a chance this weekend, so I dont know what they are whinging about.

Answer 6

The IRB appointed match officials. There is a citing officer appointed to every match. In this case it was an Australian I believe.

Thorn should have actually been yellow carded on the field. Then he wouldn't have been banned as it would have been seen as resolved.