Tindall kicked out of EPS

And fined a few quid. Naughty boy.

I assumed he was going to retire from internationals anyway, but it seems we have seen the last of him and his antics.

Whats Jamie Noon up to these days?

I wasn't aware that we really had an EPS in the usual sense yet this season. There certainly hasn't been an announcement of the 32 first choice and 32 saxons players like in previous years. Assumed they were waiting till January to announce one for the six nations.

Not a great deal of point announcing a Saxons EPS before January as there's no games for them to take part in. Interesting to see Tindal pick up a ban and fine though after Johnno backed him in NZ.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Not a great deal of point announcing a Saxons EPS before January as there's no games for them to take part in. Interesting to see Tindal pick up a ban and fine though after Johnno backed him in NZ.

They have done every other year though, and they haven't even announced the 32 man main squad for the season. Perhaps it is just assumed to be the world cup squad plus 2(A.N.Other).

I'd imagine Tindall had already played his last game in an England shirt anyway. Shame for such a legend to end his career on such an epic low, same for Wilko too.

Given the issues England have with finding consistent and rounded fly halfs over the age of 21 at the minute Wilko might not be done yet.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler

The Guardian is also reporting that Haskell and Ashton each got suspended fines of £5k for the hotel incident, with Hartley cleared entirely of wrongdoing.

Andrew said:
"Regarding the events in Dunedin, it should be stressed that the allegations of very serious wrong-doing made against Chris Ashton, Dylan Hartley and James Haskell by Annabel Newton, a member of staff at the team hotel, were entirely false. We do not believe the players had any intention to sexually harass or intimidate Ms Newton.

"However, the incident is precisely the kind of dangerous, compromising situation the players were warned about prior to departure for New Zealand and that they were specifically told to avoid in the EPS Code of Conduct. While we found that Dylan Hartley played no part in the ill-considered exchange with Annabel Newton, Chris Ashton and James Haskell's behaviour on 9 September did breach the EPS Code of Conduct and they have each been given suspended fines of £5,000."

Maybe edit something about that story into the title and original post as well, to save there being more than one thread about this.

I wouldn't have Tindall in the Glaws 1st XV personally so I don't think England are losing much here. I wonder whether it would have been different say had Foden or Ashton been in the same position.

An easy example to make really.

Obviously this will be a 'news' issue but from a rugby POV would he have been selected anyway?

On current form I very much doubt it and I guess there would have been a lot of fans slating MJ (or whoever it maybe) if he had been picked.

The WC squad was teh initial EPS squad as far as release time etc was involved.

Tindall would not have been kept in the revised squad for January anyway.

This is all just deflection tactics i fear.

Tindall has been a great servent for England in the past and a great player. Its a shame to see it all end like this.

Generally I find anything said & done by that oily worm Andrews to be extreamley suspiscious.

Ashton & Haskell getting suspended fines effectively means no punishment whatsover, but if they fail to keep their noses clean then the fines will be enforced.

I'm staggered that Tindell got a £25k fine for going out for a few beers, with permission, talking to an old friend and pretty much nothing else. I can't see this as anything other than a thinly veiled attack on MJ by squeeky.

Especially after the staggeringly biased attack disguised as a revue by Cotton (who immediately comprimised himself & his objectivity) that was drummed out and dropped.

I think that this is just a precursor of what is to come. As he supported the night out I can see a similar attack on Johnson on the cards.

Squeaky clearly doesn't like MJ and I expect MJ's position will shortly be made untenable. Unfortunately the whole England RWC experience was a comedy of errors, poor selections and man sausage-ups. Sad but true.

If this was an episode of "The Apprentice" Sir Nookie Bear Sugar would be pointing at Johnson and saying "Martin, you messed up this task badly. You had the potential to do very well and you didn't make the semi-final. I can't accept failure of that magnitude. With regret, you're fired!"

I am immediately concerned at the motive behind this draconian measure. I would like to be reassured that this is not a blatant attempt by RA to create a scapegoat for the RWC antics and to distance himself from the fallout of England's poor peformances.

I think also there is a massive side issue over whether Tindall is worth a place in the England team and squad anymore. Posters seem to initially think this is not an issue because Tindall is no longer worth a place, but what if this concerned Tuilagi or Lawes? I think people would be complaining about an over reaction by RA. Without knowing the details of Tindalls behaviour (except what was printed in the media) I find it hard to accept that this punishment is commensurate with the crime. However, it could also be the case that Tindall does deserve this, but that must purely be based on what he did. I have not seen sufficient evidence to date to warrant exclusion from the EPS. A fine and even being dropped for a match or 2 may be OK. The fact that most of us don't want him in an England shirt again is irrelevant.

kicked out and fined £25,000 is very harsh IMO, the media built up something out of nothing, the RFU should realise that, hes been wrongly punished, if it were'nt for the media trying to sell stories and over-dramatise everything then nothing would have come of this

ridiculous decision by the RFU

What about the others who were in trouble ?

Hartley - Walkie Talkie
Haskell - Walkie Talkie
Ashton - Walkie Talkie
Tuilagi - Ferry Diving

Are they to be treated similarly?

They are proffessional atheletes and they got caught getting absolutely trollied - it was stupid.

If they were better on the pitch and showed some discipline it wouldn't have been an issue.

Maesteg - See Tomathy's comment above, he shows the outcome for most of the others. In short Hask and Ashton got a 5k suspended fine and Hartley found completely blameless.

Mr Bounce wrote:I think that this is just a precursor of what is to come. As he supported the night out I can see a similar attack on Johnson on the cards.

Yes, Martin Johson permitted the players to go out for the evening, but he trusted his captain to keep them in line and make sure they didn't do anything stupid. I can't see how it's Johnson's fault that Tindall behaved as he did.

Other countries' players were allowed to go out for a few drinks but the players behaved themselves. It's the misbehaviour of the England players (of which Tindall was captain) that deserves punishment, not Johnson allowing them to go out for a few.

Carpe Diem wrote:Maesteg - See Tomathy's comment above, he shows the outcome for most of the others. In short Hask and Ashton got a 5k suspended fine and Hartley found completely blameless.

Cheers, I have Tomathy on ignore so dont read his posts...

Do you think that the relative charges are related at all to the fact that Hartley, Ashton, Haskell and Tuilagi will still be playing for England where as Tindall is likely to retire immediately?

Seems a bit harsh in retrospect to give Tindall such a hard time while making such a little example of the others.

I think with Tindall there was the issue of lying, and that he lead the group that went to the nightclub. The group that went with Moodyy left much earlier. He had responsibility in the squad as "backs capatin" and a senior player to set the example, instead he was a ringleader and instigator of trouble. He also must have been aware that he had a higher profile than other players there. A few England players going to a bar wouldnt have been a story, the husband of a royal snogging someone was.
Its quite different from Tuilagis incident which came after they were out, during the tournament his discpoline and attitude were explemlary which showed on the pitch. Tindall quite the opposite, reading some of Moodys comments post WC there was more to the slack attitude than just this incident.

The dropping from the EPS is pretty much a symbolic gesture, but quite a disgarce for a former captain. He wouldnt have been picked on form, and is due to retire at the end of the year anyway.

Blessing in disguise-now England will hopefully find a centre who doesn't finds a ball as easy to pass as a kidney stone.

Carpe Diem

I accused maestegmafia being a bit of a wum after he made a comment along the lines of "the problem for England is that during the world cup the players that have shone in the AV have been non-English qualified, but in Wales all the talk has been about the brilliant welsh talent coming through". Since this is both factually incorrect and at the expense of one team in particular, I thought it had the hallmarks of a wind up comment.

I don't actually mind the odd WUM comment from poster if it's does in the right spirit, and didn't mean my comment as a criticism so much as a dismissal so I'm surprised to see MM put me on ignore in response. I do think though that the fact that the poster has used yet another opportunity here to bring up and condemn indiscretions by English players (on a thread nothing to do with their own team) does indicate a noticeable anti-English bias (though not necessarily wummery I accept).

I never set out to irritate people or wind them up on this forum or others, so it's a shame that someone has taken it that way, but I won't lose any sleep over it.

Just thought I'd get my side out there...

Anyway, back on Tindall. I agree that the big problem here is that he lied about it. People don't easily forget how many bars they went to unless they were very drunk, so either he lied or he was so drunk that it was a serious breach of his responsibility to the team.

It could be both of course.

maestegmafia wrote:

Do you think that the relative charges are related at all to the fact that Hartley, Ashton, Haskell and Tuilagi will still be playing for England where as Tindall is likely to retire immediately?

Seems a bit harsh in retrospect to give Tindall such a hard time while making such a little example of the others.

Maybe this will help you :

"The sanctions were handed down after the players appeared before the RFU's professional rugby director Rob Andrew and legal and governance director Karena Vleck at Twickenham.

Andrew said: "We have considered all the evidence carefully and interviewed the players at length. These actions have not been taken lightly but we believe that in all these cases the sanctions are commensurate with the level of seriousness of what occurred.

"Mike Tindall's actions reached a level of misconduct that was unacceptable in a senior England player and amounted to a very serious breach of the EPS Code of Conduct. Whilst we acknowledge his previous good character it needs to be made clear that what he did will not be tolerated.

"Regarding the events in Dunedin, it should be stressed that the allegations of very serious wrong-doing made against Chris Ashton, Dylan Hartley and James Haskell by Annabel Newton, a member of staff at the team hotel, were entirely false. We do not believe the players had any intention to sexually harass or intimidate Ms Newton.

"However, the incident is precisely the kind of dangerous, compromising situation the players were warned about prior to departure for New Zealand and that they were specifically told to avoid in the EPS Code of Conduct.

"While we found that Dylan Hartley played no part in the ill-considered exchange with Annabel Newton, Chris Ashton and James Haskell's behaviour on September 9 did breach the EPS Code of Conduct and they have each been given suspended fines of £5,000. If they commit any further breaches of the Code before December 31, 2012 the fines will become due.

"Finally, these episodes and the subsequent disciplinary action should stand as a strong reminder that the highest standards of personal conduct are expected from any England player on and off the field."

The players have the right to appeal within three working days from today. "

disneychilly wrote:Blessing in disguise-now England will hopefully find a centre who doesn't finds a ball as easy to pass as a kidney stone.

Hence my tiongue in cheek comment re: Jamie Noon

faraway wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Do you think that the relative charges are related at all to the fact that Hartley, Ashton, Haskell and Tuilagi will still be playing for England where as Tindall is likely to retire immediately?

Seems a bit harsh in retrospect to give Tindall such a hard time while making such a little example of the others.

Maybe this will help you :

"The sanctions were handed down after the players appeared before the RFU's professional rugby director Rob Andrew and legal and governance director Karena Vleck at Twickenham.

Andrew said: "We have considered all the evidence carefully and interviewed the players at length. These actions have not been taken lightly but we believe that in all these cases the sanctions are commensurate with the level of seriousness of what occurred.

"Mike Tindall's actions reached a level of misconduct that was unacceptable in a senior England player and amounted to a very serious breach of the EPS Code of Conduct. Whilst we acknowledge his previous good character it needs to be made clear that what he did will not be tolerated.

"Regarding the events in Dunedin, it should be stressed that the allegations of very serious wrong-doing made against Chris Ashton, Dylan Hartley and James Haskell by Annabel Newton, a member of staff at the team hotel, were entirely false. We do not believe the players had any intention to sexually harass or intimidate Ms Newton.

"However, the incident is precisely the kind of dangerous, compromising situation the players were warned about prior to departure for New Zealand and that they were specifically told to avoid in the EPS Code of Conduct.

"While we found that Dylan Hartley played no part in the ill-considered exchange with Annabel Newton, Chris Ashton and James Haskell's behaviour on September 9 did breach the EPS Code of Conduct and they have each been given suspended fines of £5,000. If they commit any further breaches of the Code before December 31, 2012 the fines will become due.

"Finally, these episodes and the subsequent disciplinary action should stand as a strong reminder that the highest standards of personal conduct are expected from any England player on and off the field."

The players have the right to appeal within three working days from today. "

Thnaks for finding that faraway. When i first posted this topic there was no deatils in teh story I saw just a note saying "more to follow".

The exaplantion is clear concise and logical. They reviewed all the evidence of what happened on the trip, and acted.

munkian wrote:They are proffessional atheletes and they got caught getting absolutely trollied - it was stupid.

They ? Which "they" are they ?

The English rugby players photographed absoultely trollied during the world cup.....

He won't get in the Gloucester team these days now anyway. Trinder is a far better player.

I thought that Tindall was going to retire from all Ineternational rugby now that he is married into the ROYAL family..Is this fine, because Tindall is married to a member of the royal family.

Kicking him out is simply making him a kind of scapegoat,Yes he may of had a few drinks to many, but he was allowed to go out and have a few beers by the English management. Does the English management include Rob Andrew, or is Rob Andrew a seperate thing all totgether.

If Mating Johnson gets a fine will Rob Andrew also get a fine.

I assume this is an IRB attempt at forcing selector's hand on centre pairing...effectively a constructive dismissal of Tindall.

Well isn't Tindall making a very lovely scapegoat for England's failings? As soon as I saw the headline it was clear that this was happening, yes he and other players acted foolishly, but this level of punishment is quite simply ridiculous and due to him not really being in contention for starting anymore there were no worries in axing him as they wouldn't actually be missing out. Notice that Manu's drunken ferry jump hasn't resulted in a removal from the EPS, and I'd consider that more reckless and embarrassing than Tindall pulling.

You know I think thats extremely harsh on Tindall, and extremely lenient on Ashton and Haskell. Getting trollied with managements permission however ill concieved that turned out to be compared to the sexual inuendo (intentional harrassment or not) and downright odious behavior of the walkie talkie brothers.

But then again Tindalls career is pretty much over and Haskell and Ashton still have some time to go in theirs.

Rob Andrew trying to save his own skin is what this smacks of.

Anyway who has picked this EPS? who is the coach? who is the Captain? Who is the chairman. The clock is ticking.

I applaud the decision. No remorse or regret shown, just continual remarks about how it was all blown out of proportion and how the media was to blame. He was the captain and showed a total lack of leadership and accountability.

Tindall has taken the brunt,as the scapegoat and highest profile.Unlikely to play for England again.
Haskell is in NZ so out of England contention but a SUSPENDED fine?if it`s good for one should be for all.
Ashton ditto,but presumably is in the frame for England typical Squeeky devious to the Last.

There goes Andrew's Knighthood!!

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:


Thnaks for finding that faraway. When i first posted this topic there was no deatils in teh story I saw just a note saying "more to follow".

no problem, just here to help

emack2 wrote:Tindall has taken the brunt,as the scapegoat and highest profile.Unlikely to play for England again.
Haskell is in NZ so out of England contention but a SUSPENDED fine?if it`s good for one should be for all.
Ashton ditto,but presumably is in the frame for England typical Squeeky devious to the Last.

Why should different incidents require the same punishment?

Because IF there was indiscipline,and since a fine was imposed all be it SUSPENDED.Then it was perceived to have been so, then all three should be fined.
Because one is of a player who is unlikely to appear again,BUT TWO who maybe treated differently.
THAT,is hardly fair,it is certain many Countries suffered indiscipline during
the RWC,anddealt with them differently.
Some players involved may or may not be picked for there country again,some were found to have problems and were dealt with or are continueing to be dealt with by those countries.
These incidents have been happening forever in the past,BUT when everyone has a camera/recorder in there mobile phone.
Privacy is almost impossible,a lot of course depends how the players concerned do on the field afterwards.
In The case of Cory Jane for examplemhe broke curfew 4 days before a big game.
THEN had a blinder and was man of the match.

This is a sad story. The guy has bust his guts for England and in 2009-2010 saved them from obscurity. OK he's no Yannick Jauzion, but he's a hard tackling hard running man who will give 100%. It is no way to treat him in my view, but two interesting aspects:

1 It shows that deference to the Monarchy is alive and well in the English establishment

2 It shows that Johnson is a week man manager. The RFU have done this now when he should have done something about it then. His failure to understand the repercussions "rugby player drinks beer shocker" and deal with it satisfactorily lead to this mess. No censure, then an informal drop. Oh dear.

To me and an awful lot of people , whether Tins will or wont play again for England is irrelevant, for me if Andrew and his cronies thought that the England team or members of had breached their rules of conduct, why did he not overall MJ there and then, and discipline them and fine at the time. After all allegedly he is MJ boss and has the power to do as this as Mick Cleary write in his column.

If this is the case now then it smacks of Andrew looking to be the big bad man to deflect what ever is coming along the track with the other investigations due regarding the WC against him and his position, no good growing a pair after the event he should of stood up at the time and sorted it. Typical Andrew for me only concerned about him self and not anyone or thing else. We need to ask our self how many more managers left hung out to dry and coaches HE picked under his so called watch. Start at the top, fine them all from there for all there lack of leadership then start on the players, after all what example have the employers set their employees.

All B*ll*hit if you ask me a cover up and look after my self Andrew needs to go to bring some respect to himself and the RFU!!!

I think that this has been handled very badly to be honest. If any action was to be taken it should have been immediate.

MJ showed his inexperience as a manager by allowing this to get blown out of proportion. He is still very much one of the boys and has to learn that he is the manager and realise that he has a different role to play now. He will have learnt alot from all this and will be a good manager one day.

Tinds was a muppet, again. He has 2 drink driving offenses as well so its not unusual that he would be up for a drink. MJ should have laid down the law and taken immediate action.

Rob Andrew and the RFU need to take a very good look at themselves and how they have handled this situation. I personally feel that Rob Andrew is not fit for the position he is in.

emack2 wrote:Because IF there was indiscipline,and since a fine was imposed all be it SUSPENDED.Then it was perceived to have been so, then all three should be fined.
Because one is of a player who is unlikely to appear again,BUT TWO who maybe treated differently.
THAT,is hardly fair,it is certain many Countries suffered indiscipline during
the RWC,anddealt with them differently.
Some players involved may or may not be picked for there country again,some were found to have problems and were dealt with or are continueing to be dealt with by those countries.
These incidents have been happening forever in the past,BUT when everyone has a camera/recorder in there mobile phone.
Privacy is almost impossible,a lot of course depends how the players concerned do on the field afterwards.
In The case of Cory Jane for examplemhe broke curfew 4 days before a big game.
THEN had a blinder and was man of the match.

That's an absolutely ridiculous thing to say. The players were involved in completely different incidents that were determined to be of very different levels (one involving false allegations) and by players of different responsibility. It may well be the case that Tindall's punishment was heavy handed (though you and I don't have access to the evidence, literature and guidelines that dictate that), but to say that Ashton & Haskell should have exactly the same punishment makes as much sense as saying different onfield incidents like punching a player and throwing a ball away before a lineout should both receive a red card and a 6 week ban. I trust you're not involved in the legal profession.

To be honest as has been said above,Rob Andrew was presentin NZ with MJ
it should have been set tled on the spo
All anyone knows is what was in the Media not what actually happened.
The size of the fine shows the incidents were seperate and not as bad BUT.
If one player is punished,and two others put on probation effectively told behave and we`ll forget it.
THAT is not justice that is a cop out.

You're in no position to come to that conclusion though. You've admitted that we don't know the reality of what happened (only what has been reported by a headline hunting press) and that they were distinct incidents deemed to be of very different levels. You've no credibility in asserting that the punishments for Ashton & Haskell were a cop out, particularly when the official conclusion was that the allegations against them were false. It would be nonsensical to mete out similar punishments under those circumstances.

You miss the point,the fact that Ashton/Haskell WERE fined even if suspended.That THERE was a breach of discipline by them Too,BUT they at least may play again for England.Tindall is perceived to be past it and has been dumped because as the Princess Royal`s Husband he is a high profile target.
It gives me no pleasure to learn that another country, has had a player again infringed after promising to be good.
Two seperate reports BUT if the one I read is true,good bye Test career.

In the light of this, I wonder what will happen to zac Guildford after his recent antics?

hawalsh wrote:You're in no position to come to that conclusion though. You've admitted that we don't know the reality of what happened (only what has been reported by a headline hunting press) and that they were distinct incidents deemed to be of very different levels. You've no credibility in asserting that the punishments for Ashton & Haskell were a cop out, particularly when the official conclusion was that the allegations against them were false. It would be nonsensical to mete out similar punishments under those circumstances.

To be honest though, it looks like Tindall has been made a high profile scape goat and that others equally guilty of drunkeness, tom foolery and jumping off Ferry's have gotten off scot free.

What is interesting is the RFU's lack of ability to punish making an example to the rest of the World for the embarrassment that the England players caused their country. The party mantra of "rugby player drinks beer, Shocker!" still holds. Thing is it was never the right mantra...

IF it is true about Zac Guildford,goodbye All Blacks,Goodbye Crusaders,goodbye Hawkes Bay.He was a very promising Winger,
possibly he would have been a great.He also has a drink problem
so that`s it career over.

He was past his sell by date.He was expendable.Nice one,RFU.Never a big fan coz he wasnt much cop.Whole-hearted-definitely;mobile as a telephone kiosk but with worse hands.
England will be better without him,whoever they pick.