Wimbledon 2012: Should Nalbandian Be Allowed to Play? Current Poll 75/25 Say Yes

David Nalbandian's disqualification for injuring a linesman at the pre-Wimbledon event at Queen's Club certainly grabbed the biggest headlines over the weekend.

The Argentinian is to be the subject of a New Scotland Yard assault enquiry, has been fined $12,560 for "unsportsmanlike behaviour," docked his $57,350 prize money and forfeited any of the ATP ranking points he would have earned from the event, via ESPN.

But is this enough punishment for his vicious, though unintentional assault, and should Nalbandian be allowed to play at Wimbledon?

Imagine Wayne Rooney or Cristiano Ronaldo running into the advertising board at Euro 2012, kicking down the sign and somehow causing a nearby official or spectator to receive an inch-long gash in their leg.

Would their "crime" result in actions similar to those described against Nalbandian?

Of course.

Nalbandian has said he's sorry to the victim of his crime, linesman Andrew McDougall, but is it enough?

Yes, I know he didn't mean it—but what did he mean? Surely players can't go round lashing out just because they lose their serve.

Is it the "pressure of the tour" as Nalbandian alluded to during his post-match press conference?

What pressure? Nalbandian has earned over $11 million from the ATP tour. I wonder what sort of "pressure" he feels subjected to.

Nalbandian, of course, isn't the first player to be defaulted from an ATP event. Gentleman Tim Henman was disqualified from the doubles at Wimbledon 1995 after accidentally hitting a ball at a ball girl.

Jeff Tarango saved the umpire the trouble of disqualifying him the same year at Wimbledon; picking up his bags and walking off court in objection to partisan crowd support. Tarango's wife even slapped the umpire's face as he left the court.   

Personally, I'm surprised the All-England Club haven't already told him he's unwelcome at SW19.

What do you think?