The past week might just have been the worst week of rugby news in history. Not ‘the worst’ because it has been dull – far from it – ‘the worst’ in the sense that almost all the news has been bad. To my mind, there have been at least ten pieces of rugby-legal news this week which have cast a shadow over the sport. Each merits its own in-depth article, but it has been impossible to keep up. This article will try to sum up and briefly reflect upon the week’s events.

1 – World Rugby’s Nations Championship

Ever since The New Zealand Herald broke the story last Thursday that World Rugby’s proposed ‘World League’ was to be an elite 12-team competition excluding the Pacific Islands, the rugby world (or perhaps more pertinently, the rugby ‘Twittersphere’) has barely stopped for breath. For a full analysis of the pros/cons of the leaked plan, see my earlier article here and listen to our discussion of it on the ‘In the Bin Rugby’ podcast here.

The International Rugby Players Council immediately responded, raising concerns over player welfare and Tier 2 participation, and forcing World Rugby to issue a defensive statement insisting that there had been a misunderstanding. Pacific Rugby Players Welfare then raised the possibility of a Rugby World Cup boycott by the Pacific Island nations. Georgia and various other Tier 2 rugby nations have also made statements in clear opposition to the ‘World League’.

What’s more, there have been claims of ‘conflict of interest’ levelled at Agustín Pichot, the vice-chairman of World Rugby who also sits on the USA Rugby Board. Indeed, such claims are well-substantiated: whether or not he is paid for his work on the USAR Board, his position is in conflict with his position as a leader of the international game. World Rugby Bye-Law 9.5.1(e) states:

“The Vice-Chairman role is not independent so the elected Vice-Chairman shall be one of the Representatives of his Union or Association and will not be in addition to that Union or Association’s Council member(s)”

However, Pichot’s Union/Association on the Council is Argentina. That he also sits on the USAR Board seems to go beyond what this bye-law allows: there is still a conflict of interest.

Nonetheless, World Rugby moved to quell the unrest on Wednesday morning by releasing a video explaining its ‘actual’ ‘Nations Championship’ proposal. The full details can be read here. However, the seriousness of the dialogue between the IRPC and World Rugby earlier in the week suggests to me that the leaked plan is closer to the reality of current negotiations, and that World Rugby’s announcement remains more of a ‘pipe dream’.

Indeed, this ‘pipe dream’ is far from perfect. It entails many of the issues identified in my previous article, particularly as to player welfare, fan experience, broadcasting deals and devaluing the Rugby World Cup. Moreover, though the Nations Championship includes a system of promotion and relegation, it still threatens to entrench division in the international game by giving Tier 1 fixtures to only two Tier 2 sides, while the rest are excluded. With only one team going up/down, this could lead to elite 11 teams and then ‘the rest’. World Rugby’s proposal also purports to be based on merit yet Georgia, who are above Italy in the world rankings, remain outside of the top division.

As if that wasn’t enough, it was then reported that English and French clubs are threatening a legal challenge. At present, the Nations Championship plan would see the top teams play three league matches in November, followed by a semi-final and final. This would bring the international game into even greater conflict with the domestic season in the Northern Hemisphere.

It is clear World Rugby are keen to grow the international game and make it more exciting. That should be applauded. However, they have an unenviable task given the competing interests of all the Unions and this is an issue which is going to take time to resolve.

2 – Saracens’ Salary Cap Management

On Sunday, the Daily Mail revealed that Saracens owner Nigel Wray is in business with Owen Farrell, Richard Wigglesworth and the two Vunipola brothers, and has also co-owned houses with former Saracens players. Premiership Rugby has confirmed that it will investigate this information and determine whether Saracens are in breach of its salary cap regulations (found here).

The salary cap is set at £7m until the end of the 2019-2020 season and, though clubs are allowed two ‘marquee’ players outside of this cap, the regulations are comprehensive, ensuring that benefits in kind and payments of any variety are included. Clubs can also claim credits for ‘homegrown senior players’, injured players and players on international duty. Saracens claim that they are acting within this framework.

However, it is strange that Wray would go into business with his star players for any reason other than to increase their income, particularly given that the businesses in question are financial management firms (Faz Investments Ltd and Wiggy9 Investments Ltd) and real estate management company (Vunprop Ltd) – it is unlikely that these players have taken the initiative here (unlike, for example, with Wolfpack Lager). The full details are revealed by the Daily Mail report and are certainly worth reading.

Paragraph 1(p) of Schedule 1 of the PRL Salary Capping Regulations states that “any payment or benefit in kind which the Player would not have received if it were not for his involvement with a Club” will be included in a player’s salary. There is certainly a strong argument that the players in question would not have gone into business with Wray and thus acquired the benefits of these companies had they not played for Saracens. It is thus tentatively submitted that benefits derived from these companies should be included in the players’ salaries. Co-ownership of houses must also fall under the cap.

Whether or not this means Saracens have breached the salary cap is impossible to say without knowing the details of what they pay each player. However, the picture painted by the Daily Mail investigation is not a positive one. I hope to write a more extensive piece on this issue soon.

3 – Welsh Rugby’s ‘Project Reset’

Welsh rugby has also been up in arms this week. On Monday night, it emerged that a merger between the Scarlets and Ospreys was being considered as part of ‘Project Reset’ – the project of the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) and the Professional Rugby Board (representing the regions) to plan a more sustainable future for Welsh rugby. Indeed, the Scarlets have since stated that heads of terms had been agreed between the two over the merger.

However, on Tuesday Ospreys chairman Mike James sensationally resigned, stating Project Reset had become “Project Inept” and alleging “catastrophic mismanagement”. On Wednesday, Scarlets confirmed that the merger was off the table. The new Ospreys chairman will oversee a legal review of the WRU’s actions in administrating Project Reset and, in particular, concerns over:

“the independence of the WRU’s role given its conflict of interests, the lack of appropriate transparency and adequate governance in the Project Reset process, as well as inducements by officers of the WRU for the regional side to commit further private funds to the game while acting against its interests”

What will come of this is far from clear. There is a complex web of relationships behind ‘Project Reset’, and it is not entirely clear which body is driving the process. Nonetheless, it is lamentable that a project aimed at securing a positive future for the sport in Wales has led to such a messy public affair, especially given the national side are currently chasing a Six Nations Grand Slam.

4 – Liz Patu Banned for Biting

On Tuesday, it was reported that Queensland Women’s hooker and Australia Women’s captain Liz Patu has been banned for six weeks for biting an opponent. As a result, she will miss the rest of the Super W tournament.

The minimum sanction for a biting offence under World Rugby Regulation 17 Appendix 1 is 12 weeks, with the maximum four years. That Patu received only a six-week ban thus seems somewhat fortuitous. The disciplinary panel considered that her previous good character, clean disciplinary record and remorse meant that she was deserving of maximum mitigation (50%). Patu stated: “my actions the other night were unacceptable and will not be repeated”.

It is identical to the ban former Bulls prop Pierre Schoeman received last season for biting and similar to Dylan Hartley’s eight-week ban for the same offence in 2012 (Hartley had a worse record). In 2016, Chris Ashton was banned for 13 weeks for biting, and there were no mitigating factors – indeed, his poor disciplinary record counted against him. The Patu decision thus seems relatively consistent with previous cases, but nonetheless seems somewhat lenient given the despicable nature of the offence.

5 – The RFU to Axe the England Sevens Team

Late on Wednesday, The Telegraph reported that the RFU are considering axing the England Sevens team as part of a drastic cost-cutting exercise. It is suggested this might happen as early as the end of this season, and the RFU wants to adopt the Team GB model on a permanent basis. This would apparently save around £2m a year, with the Welsh Rugby Union and Scottish Rugby Union sharing in the cost.

The idea might seem attractive given Sevens is now an Olympic sport. At present, England, Wales and Scotland compete independently in the annual World Sevens Series, but together under Team GB at the Olympics. Having a single team throughout the four-year cycle would surely help with Olympic preparation. However, many are concerned about the impact this would have on the player development pathways of Scotland and Wales. Scotland, in particular, use the World Sevens Series as a development tool for their rising international stars and there is a concern that this would be lost if a centralised system was introduced.

Nigel Melville, the RFU’s acting CEO, insisted that they are not “about to axe the England Sevens squad” but this will come as scant consolation to the specialist Sevens players in each of the three nations whose squad futures are now uncertain.

6 – Alleged Match-Fixing in Australian Rugby

Thursday brought news of alleged match-fixing by the Wallabies. The Sydney Morning Herald reported that high-ranking sports officials in Australia are to contact Rugby Australia about re-opening an investigation into the possibility of match-fixing of a Wallabies match “several years ago”. The report states that these officials have serious doubts about the behaviour of at least three Wallabies players involved in a match Australia was strongly expected to win.

The Herald reports that there was a “top-secret investigation” within Australian rugby but on Friday, Rugby Australia responded, stating they had “seen no evidence in regards to inappropriate betting activity or match fixing”. Wallabies captain Michael Hooper said he was “shocked” by the allegations while Australia’s Rugby Union Players’ Association (RUPA) hit out at what is described as “unsubstantiated allegations” and called upon anyone with evidence of impropriety to report it immediately.

These are incredibly serious allegations that must not be taken lightly. Rugby Union has no history of match-fixing and it is hoped it does not start now. However, it is also hoped that they are investigated thoroughly: match-fixing undermines the very essence of sport and is one of the single-greatest threats to its integrity.

7 – Ox Nche Banned for 8 Weeks

Also on Thursday, it was announced that Cheetahs prop Ox Nche had been banned for 8 weeks after the PRO14 Disciplinary Committee found him guilty of “striking with the shoulder” contrary to Law 9.12 – “A player must not physically abuse anyone”.

The incident (which can be viewed here) came about as the prop made a late charge into Leinster’s Fergus McFadden – who had kicked the ball – and made contact with the Irish player’s head. Nche used no arms in the tackle and the Disciplinary Committee held that the contact to the head was intentional.

It considered that the foul play merited that top-entry point sanction of ten weeks, which was reduced to eight owing to the player’s previously clean disciplinary record and his good conduct at the hearing. Nche will be unable to play until 20 May 2019.

This is a strong disciplinary decision sending the right message about foul play involving players’ heads, but it does raise three issues. Firstly, it is odd that the referee (Nigel Owens) only awarded a yellow card at the time. The Disciplinary Committee, of course, had the benefit of time and enhanced replays but it is hoped this decision will act as a precedent for on-field decisions. Related to this point; the decision only makes it appear stranger that Samu Kerevi received no sanction for his reckless shoulder charge into Leigh Halfpenny’s head in the autumn (discussed here). Thirdly, it is disappointing to see “good hearing conduct” being used to reduce sanctions. As I have previously argued, though this is permitted by the regulations, it is an inappropriate mitigating factor.

8 – Mark Jennings Pleads Guilty to Assaulting a Police Officer and a Public Order Offence

On Friday morning, the Daily Mail reported that Mark Jennings had been released on bail after pleading guilty to “assaulting a police officer and a charge of causing a public order offence by using threatening, abusive and insulting a police officer” at Manchester Magistrates Court.

At the start of February, Sale Sharks announced that the player would be taking a sabbatical away from professional rugby for the “foreseeable future” which, as it results, was just days after his arrest.

Sentencing was adjourned until later this month so that the magistrates could consider reports on Jennings’ mental health. The sensationalist writing of the Daily Mail aside, it seems a worrying case. The abusive language and behaviour allegedly used is abhorrent and deserving of criminal sanction, but there must also be concern for Jennings’ health. It is hoped that the case can be resolved swiftly so the player can begin his recovery.

9 – Chiliboy Ralepelle Reportedly Fails Doping Test

On Friday afternoon, to complete the full-house of headlines, it was reported that South African hooker Chiliboy Ralepelle has failed a drugs test. Though the player has denied it, South African media have reported that the Sharks front rower failed a test on 17 January. When asked, the Sharks’ CEO Gary Teichmann said that he could not comment on the matter but, if the rumours prove true, Ralepelle could be in trouble.

He was previously banned for two years in 2015 after the anabolic steroid Drostanolone was detected in a urine sample – though its source could never be identified (full decision here) – and, if found to have committed another Anti-Doping Rule Violation (ADRV), the 32-year-old could face a career-ending ban. Under World Rugby Regulation 21.10.7, the period of ineligibility for an athlete’s second ADRV can be double what it would otherwise be if it was a first violation. The World Anti-Doping Code was updated in 2015 such that a four-year ban is the now starting point for an ADRV, as opposed to a two-year ban (as it was at the time of Ralepelle’s first ADRV). As such, Ralepelle could be facing an eight-year ban, unless he can establish “no significant fault or negligence” (21.10.5) or any of the mitigating factors in 21.10.6.

It must be reiterated, though, that nothing has yet been proved and that there are many ways in which athletes may fail a doping test without intentionally cheating. As I have argued before, we must continue to give athletes the benefit of the doubt: Ralepelle is innocent until proven guilty.

10 – Pat Lambie’s Concussion Revelations

Finally, an interview in The Times with Pat Lambie at the start of the week revealed the troubling consequences of concussion which he continues to suffer, 10 months after his last rugby match:

“I still wake up with a throbbing head. It’s like waking up with a hangover but you haven’t had any fun the night before. Or it’s like someone’s whacked you on the head with a baseball bat. It’s a pounding headache.”

The former Springbok and Racing 92 fly-half retired in January this year aged just 28 owing to these “persistent post-concussion symptoms”. He suffered four notable concussions in the space of two years and his condition had been so bad that he hadn’t even been able to participate in weights training.

His story is reminiscent of the accounts of other players like Dominic Ryan, Shontayne Hape, and Cameron Pierce who have been forced to retire due to concussion and serves as a chilling reminder of the dangers of elite rugby. It also serves to reiterate the importance of the work being done by rugby’s authorities to reduce the risk of suffering head injuries and as reminder that there is plenty more to be done.

Many, though – particularly in France – need no reminding. There was also a report in The Telegraph this week counting the cost of four tragic rugby player deaths in eight months, which have prompted meetings at the highest level as to how the game can be made safer. With the Cillian Willis case also pending (read my full analysis here) it is an issue which will remain at the forefront of the game for a long time to come.

Concluding Thoughts

This has been a week from hell for rugby. Foul play, both on and off the field, coupled with commercial pressures, internal bickering and the looming spectre of concussion have shown the sport in a bad light. Though it has provided an abundance of rugby-legal blogging fodder, let’s hope that, as of this weekend, rugby can go back to doing its talking on the pitch, rather than off it.