Armitage ‘an habitual offender’
The Toulon full-back faced a misconduct complaint brought by European Professional Club Rugby following his teamâs European Champions Cup defeat against Leicester at Welford Road earlier this month.
A complaint regarding an on-pitch incident was dismissed by anindependent disciplinary panel, but he was found guilty of misconduct following a post-match episode with fans at the ground, and banned for 12 weeks.
After the match, which was won 25-21 by Leicester, Armitage made a number of comments within earshot of spectators â including children â using foul and abusive language.
The hearing was told that Armitage had been making his way from the Toulon team bus to the Legends Lounge at Welford Road for a post-match meal when he was greeted by autograph hunters, including the 11-year-old son of Stephen Hampson.
âThe player signed Master Hampsonâs programme, though he declined to be photographed with him,â said the judgement.
âAs the player left the pitch level walkway and started to go up the steps to the Legends Lounge entrance, there was an interaction with a group of Tigers fans.
âThe player admitted in his evidence that he had sworn at them and had used the words âf*** offâ twice and raised his hand/arm in a dismissive wave away, which he had not intended to be threatening.
âMr Hampson told the committee that the player seemed very agitated and was shouting in an intimidating and threatening manner.â
The judgement continued: âWhen questioned by the committee about why he reacted to people who had been drinking, he said it was lightbanter. He accepted that he had told them to âf*** offâ twice.
Armitage was banned for eight weeks in 2011 after a misconduct complaint was upheld in terms of using threatening and/or abusive language towards an anti-doping official, while he has been suspended on three separate occasions for incidents of foul play on the pitch.
The on-pitch misconduct complaint that was dismissed arose from spectators complaining about Armitageâs conduct during the match, but the committee foundinconsistencies in terms of evidence provided by witnesses.





