You'd think a Sale Sharks player would've learnt a bit of Afrikaans by now.

With no evidence, it was never going to go anywhere as per a normal legal process.

Exactly. From what I have read it seems Mbonambi said he shouted "watter kant" (meaning which side) and Curry heard it as a cloudberry insult which seems understandable. if there is no other evidence there was little point taking it further. 

https://www.englandrugby.com/news/article/rfu-statement-tom-curry-october-2023" rel="nofollow - https://www.englandrugby.com/news/article/rfu-statement-tom-curry-october-2023

I for one don't buy the Afrikaans excuse for one bit but it is amazing how rabidly SA fans leapt on it as justification for what was said.

However he should have made a statement explaining the comment and apologised for any misunderstanding or offence that it caused.

They are both great players and I think World rugby dropped the ball and we should move on from this. I don’t think at any point has Curry or Bombi gave reason for the press and fans to drag out this situation. 

No I am sorry but that statement does not say that Curry did not have an opportunity to put his evidence before World Rugby. It merely suggests that he wasn't given an opportunity to put his evidence before a different investigative panel.

If (big if as I know no more about World Rugby's investigation than anyone else here I would imagine) both parties had their say and there was no other evidence it comes down to one man's word against another and I can't see how any other court in the world could come to a different decision other than perhaps the Scottish not proven.

To be clear I want New Zealand to win tonight and would be delighted if South Africa went into the game without a recognised hooker but I would rather that be because he had been proven guilty of committing and offence rather than because others for whatever reason would like him to be guilty.

The disciplinary panel in this instance would have been instructed to investigate the matter by World Rugby, if they deemed it worthy of doing so.

So by the very fact that no disciplinary panel was formed (at the request of World Rugby as the governing body overseeing the event in which the alleged abuse took place) it can only be concluded that Curry was not provided the opportunity to have his voice heard on the record and in an official capacity.

However, this point is an aside as to whether or not the SA hooker is actually guilty of anything, or indeed if anything could be proved either way if he did abuse Curry, given the apparent lack of witnesses and other contributory evidence at the time of the incident.

Your last point regarding SA being punished by losing their hooker is besides the point, as England have now finished their campaign and the result tonight therfore has no bearing on Curry or England. Likewise, whether or not Curry was abused, it ultimately would not have affected the outcome of the semi final last week, which England eventually lost solely due to the series of scrum penalties against them.

I won't be so pompous as to call another poster incorrect. 

I will continue to post my opinion which remains that Curry's evidence was heard until I hear otherwise. The very fact that a process took place to determine whether there was a case to answer shows that there was an investigation. My view would change if Curry did not have a say in this process but I have seen nothing to suggest this was the case. 

I'll also stick with my opinion that without any other evidence no panel or court in the World could legitimately produce a guilty verdict.

As for England not benefitting should Mbonambi have been found guilty well of course they wouldn't. That is the case in all incidents when a citing results in a subsequent ban. I of course made no such claim.

However, as has been said before, the beauty of this forum is that it normally allows for discussion, debate and difference of opinion in a civil manner, free from insult or trivial 'name calling'.

My hope and expectation is that those who post and contribute to the forum will continue to abide by that practice, however fervently they may feel about a particular topic. 

With regards to the Curry affair, perhaps its best to agree to disagree in this instance and move on. After all, when all is said and done, life is too short to harbour any discontent.

Oh the total irony of that post!

But no problem I don't harbour discontent with pompous or even hypocritical posters.

Remember everyone to be nice to each other.