Changing the way rugby deals with extreme acts of violence
Rugby is a dynamic game. When athletes in top condition are running, jumping, tackling and throwing themselves into rucks, it’s inevitable that there are going to be injuries. In fact, you’d be hard pressed to find a professional player in this day and age who hasn’t been forced to spend a considerable amount of time on the side-line due to injury.
Yes, when you sign up to play a sport like rugby, you have to accept that sometimes you are going to get hurt – hopefully not seriously, but sometimes that’s unavoidable too.
When you sign up to play rugby, however, you do not sign up to have your safety unduly put at risk due to some players not just breaching the rules of the game, but also, frankly, breaking the law.
After spending only one minute on the field of play, Connacht prop Dominic Robertson-McCoy was recently sent off in a match against Leinster for what can only be described as an act of extreme foul play. With barely ten minutes remaining in the match, Robertson-McCoy stomped on the head of Leinster flanker Josh van der Flier – an act which would surely have done considerable damage if van der Flier hadn’t been wearing a scrum cap.
Whilst retaliation is never a defence when it comes to getting violent on the rugby field, there are sometimes mitigating circumstances than can partially explain some brain explosions. In Robertson-McCoy’s case, however, there was no provocation except for Robertson-McCoy’s foot being held onto for a second too long. Van der Flier was lying prone on the floor when his head was stomped on, with no way to defend himself.
The fact that he was not seriously injured is a miracle, but the events that have followed the sending off are quite the opposite.
Cited and facing the disciplinary panel, Robertson-McCoy was quick to admit his guilt – something which apparently influenced the panel’s final decision to decrease the ban administered from the 12-week entry-point down to a mere six weeks.
Let’s unpack this decision, shall we?
First and foremost, the fact that Robertson-McCoy owned up to his mistake should have had zero impact on the ban dished out. Professional rugby is played in front of audiences of tens of thousands of people – most of whom have access to countless video angles and replays of every event that takes place on the field. A quick search online turns up multiple videos of the stomp, making it plain and obvious to everyone that Robertson-McCoy was guilty.
Although it’s pretty clear from his actions that he may not have his head screwed on quite right, Robertson-McCoy was never going to show up for his hearing and claim that he wasn’t guilty – there was absolutely zero evidence that could possibly have found him innocent. The fact that his admission was enough to half his ban is absolutely ludicrous – why is the entry-point for the foul play that Robertson-McCoy was guilty of 12 weeks if, as is likely to be the case in 90% of scenarios, the average ban served is going to be significantly less than that due to most players admitting their guilt?
Further, we’ve reached a point we’re remorse is now being used as a justification for decreasing the length of a ban – but surely if a player does not show remorse then the ban should simply be extended indefinitely until remorse is present? If a player stomps on another’s head for no justifiable reason and then shows no remorse then is that not indicative that they will continue to commit the same offence?
That on its own should be enough to hand out an indefinite ban, but for whatever reason bans are actually being reduced when a player admits they’ve made a mistake, instead of that being the minimum requirement for not handing out more severe punishments.
Even worse, the entry-point for a ban seems to be based on the fact that a player has previously committed offences in the past. If a player has had zero run-is with the judicial jury in the past then their “previous good behaviour” apparently impacts the severity of the law breach that they have committed.
Again, previous convictions should increase the ban being handed out – if the entry-point for a ban is 12 weeks then past bad behaviour should see the player unable to play for a lengthier period of time.
Focussing on Robertson-McCoy again, the fact that he will be back on the field in six weeks is an insult to the game. Players expect that they’re going to be hit hard when playing, and sometimes tempers will flare on the field – but no one should have to deal with their head being intentionally stomped on by a 120kg man wearing studded boots.
To be perfectly honest, in circumstances like these where an act takes place that is so far outside the laws of the game, punishments should be handed out by higher powers than rugby disciplinary committees. If you were approached by a man in the street who attacked you unprovoked, you would hope that he was served a very hefty fine and sentenced to some time behind bars. For whatever reason, atrocities committed on the rugby field are viewed differently – even though those atrocities are being broadcast to thousands of people around the world, including children.
Like it or not, professional rugby players are role-models. Their behaviour is going to influence the many people that tune in to watch them play every week and the last thing we need is for these role-models to escape proper sanctioning when they commit foul play.
Not a month goes by where discussions don’t take place regarding how recklessness on the rugby field should be punished – it seems like the lawmakers are constantly debating how challenging for the ball in the air should be treated. Yet for some unidentifiable reason, we’re choosing not to properly deal with acts of extreme violence – something which unquestionably needs to be eliminated from the game.
In other news:
Comments on RugbyPass
$950k for a Prop that isn’t fit enough to play 10 mins of rugby? Surely there is someone better to replace Big Mike with
2 Go to commentsFour Kiwis in that backline. A solid statement on the lack of invention, risk-taking and joy in the NH game; game of attrition and head- banging tedium. Longterm medical problems aplenty in the future!
1 Go to commentsGood article, I learnt quite a lot. A big sliding door moment was in the mid 00s when they rejected Steve Anderson's long term transformation and he wrote Ireland's strategy instead.
2 Go to commentsHi Dr Nick! I'm worried that I've started to enjoy watching England and have actually wanted them to win their last two games. What would you prescribe? On a more serious note, I've noticed that the standard of play in March is often better than early February. Do you think this is because of the weather or because the players have been together for longer?
10 Go to commentsMy question in all this brett is who is going to wear the consequences of these actions? Surely just getting the sack isn’t sufficient? A teenager working the till at woolies would probably get taken to court if they took $20 out of the till. You mean to tell me that someone can spend $2.6 million and get away with it? Where was it spent? What companies/people were the beneficiaries etc? How is it just being talked about as an ‘oopsie’ and we all just move on and not a matter of the court for gross negligence, fraud, take your pick…
18 Go to commentslove Manu too but England have relied on him coming back from injury for far too long and not sorted the position with someone else long term . It will be a blessing he has gone . Huge shame he was so injury prone . God speed Manu .
3 Go to commentsI agree with Ben Smith about Brett Cameron. The No. 6 position has to be a monster and a genuine lineout option, like Ollivon, Lawes (now Chessum), Du Toit, etc. The only player who fits that bill right now is Scott Barrett. A fit and fizzing Tuipolotu together with one of the young towers, Sam Darry or Josh Lord, would give Razor the freedom to play Barret at 6.
16 Go to commentsOutstanding article, Graham. Agree with all of it. And enjoy the style of writing too (particularly Grand Slap!).
2 Go to commentsI wouldn't pay a cent for that loafer. He just stands around, waiting for play to come his way. He won't make the Wallabies.
2 Go to commentsGood bit of te reo maori Nic. Or is that Niko or Nikora? On the theme of trees the Oaks v Totara. Game plan would be key. I have one but it would cost you.
10 Go to comments> Shaun Edwards’ You should not have to score 30 points to win a game, as exciting as it is. This statement was surprising to me. It is nonsensical .I guess it is a defence coach speaking. But head coach, defence and attacking coaches all work together. They are inseparable. You score more than the opposition to win. It only needs to be one score. You score whatever the game demands, whatever the opposition demand. You defend whatever it takes. The attack coach needs to be able to clock up 30pts if need be.
10 Go to commentsWho’d have thought, not having Farrell & Youngs kicking the ball at every possible opportunity and playing flat and allowing your centres to run and pass would pay off? No one could possibly have seen this coming. FML. It took a LONG time coming but at least that time has finally come. England need to find a backup to Lawrence. Freeman is the best candidate for me, I see no reason why he can't play 12. He's big, strong, fast and has great hands.
10 Go to commentsLove Manu but he's not the player he was and I imagine Bayonne have paid too much money for him.
3 Go to commentsNew Zealand have not beaten England since 2018 and even that was a pretty close shave.
1 Go to comments“a renewed focus on Scottish-qualified players” Scottish-qualified is another way of saying English. England has development more players for the Scotland national Rugby team in the last 4 years, than Scotland has.
2 Go to commentsThis sounds a lot like the old Welsh rugby proverb “Wales never lose. Other teams just score more points.”
5 Go to commentsFinally,at last, Borthwick has done what the whole of England have been crying out for. Ditch the kick chase and let the players have freedom to attack and run with the ball. It was great to see. Ford played really well and for the first time in ages was 5 yards closer to the gainline which then allowed a more attacking position . Pity it has taken 90 odd caps to do so. However, this has to continue and not be a false dawn . One issue. Marcus. With Ford having one really good game in 5 ,is he the answer long term . Smith puts bums on seats and is terrific to watch . How can you leave him out before he departs for France in disillusion . England are in danger of Simmons , Alex Goode , Cipriani , Mercer and now Smith being unable to get a selection ahead of “favourites” of the management regardless of form . Great to see England play so well .
2 Go to commentsCockerill was an abrasive player in the mould of a Georgian front rower who will have the respect of that pack. Looking forward to seeing what he can do with this exciting team, hopefully they can send a message to unions like Wales that money alone doesn't buy you wins.
2 Go to commentsI like the look of those July matches. Hopefully they'll get some good tests in November too.
2 Go to commentsThis is a poor article, essentially just trolling six nations teams
22 Go to comments