- Thread starter
- #26
The tribunal claimed that Close was "tackled essentially face-first into the ground". This is factually incorrect. Both Close's Knee and Will Day's arm which is under Close's body make impact with the ground before hand.Therefore it is not face first but rather face third.
Both of these impacts would have reduced the impact of the face hitting the ground.
That the tribunals reasoning for high impact is factually incorrect as evidenced by this screenshot, is there room for appeal?
(assuming the summation of the reasoning is accurate)
The summation of Tribunal Reasons for upholding the ban.
Both of these impacts would have reduced the impact of the face hitting the ground.
That the tribunals reasoning for high impact is factually incorrect as evidenced by this screenshot, is there room for appeal?
(assuming the summation of the reasoning is accurate)
The summation of Tribunal Reasons for upholding the ban.