Gloucester-Worcester cancellation: Full 26-page verdict published
A fascinating chain of correspondence – including a disagreement on what was allegedly said between the respective club owners – has been revealed in the full ‘reasoned decision’ published on Tuesday by Premiership Rugby regarding the circumstances of the recently cancelled Gloucester versus Worcester Gallagher Premiership.
A Sports Resolutions investigation into the cancelled March 25 match resulted in the April 21 decision to award a match result of 20-0 and five league points to Gloucester as a consequence of Worcester cancelling the fixture at Kingsholm.
Last month’s initial verdict decision was accompanied at the time by the promise to publish the written judgement and that has now happened 19 days later, Premiership Rugby offering up a riveting 26-page document that explained how the situation over tighthead unavailability unfolded at Worcester and led to the match cancellation.
The judgement outlined how the Warriors had six tightheads registered for the 2021/22 campaign, but one retired due to injury earlier in the season and another had suffered a long-term injury. It then explained what happened in the lead-up that week to the trip to Kingsholm that resulted in “consequently, on the afternoon of the match, Worcester had no available tighthead props”.
This was despite Worcester team manager Luke Broadley contacting all the other top-flight clubs the day before via WhatsApp to see could loan players be recruited to head off their impending emergency.
According to the judgement: “By mid-Thursday, March 22, Worcester had concerns about the risk that they would not have sufficient registered front row players available for the match the following day. Loaned front row players could be registered up to 5pm on the day of the match.
“Understanding the risks of unavailability at tighthead, at 12.31pm on Thursday, Luke Broadley circulated a message to a WhatsApp group comprising the Premiership club team managers: ‘We have illness and covid in camp. If anyone has any loose or tighthead props available could you please drop me a message please.’ It appears that all but three of the recipients opened that message before 1pm and a further recipient opened it just after 3pm. However, no response was received from any.
“Broadley did not telephone, or otherwise contact, any other club to seek a loan player. However, he asked two Worcester development coaches, Johnny Goodridge and Chris Morgan, to telephone the Championship clubs they had previously coached (Hartpury and Cornish Pirates respectively), to see whether they had any players to loan; but (he said) they came back, before he contacted PRL, to say that they did not have any available props.”
Sections 32 of the 66 section report also noted the communication between the respective Gloucester and Worcester club owners on the day of the match: “At 10.49am, Martin St Quinton (Gloucester’s chairman) messaged Jason Whittingham (Worcester’s co-owner) asking Worcester to do everything they could to raise a team as ‘if we call the game off it will cost us £250,000’.
“He offered to lend a front row player or two if that would help get the game on. Whittingham responded: ‘We want to play and are doing all we can to field a team. Steve (Diamond) due to update us shortly.’ He also telephoned St Quinton at about 11am to say that Worcester were struggling and unlikely to field a team.
“St Quinton’s evidence was that he made clear to Whittingham that cancelling a match was very serious, given that a large crowd was expected and the match was to be televised. St Quinton was clear that Whittingham did not appear to appreciate the seriousness of a cancellation until he had received Phil Winstanley’s email of 12.24pm; but Whittingham, although he accepted that he might have said that, denied that that was in fact the case.
“At about 3.30pm (after the match had been cancelled), they spoke again. What was said is not agreed. St Quinton’s evidence was that Whittingham told him he had been ‘outvoted’ by Colin Goldring (the other Worcester co-owner) and Diamond, who did not wish the match to be played because Worcester had an important Premiership Cup match against Bath the following Wednesday.
“Whittingham accepted that he may have said he had been ‘outvoted’ – although that was not in fact the case – but he strongly denied suggesting that the match had been cancelled because of another fixture on the following Wednesday.”
- Click here to read the full reasoned decision from Sports Resolutions
Comments on RugbyPass
I wouldn’t spend the time on Nawaqanitawase! No point in having him filling in a jersey when he’s committed to leave Union. Give the jersey to a young prospect who will be here in the future.
4 Go to commentsIt was a pleasure to watch those guys playing with such confidence. That trio can all be infuriating for different reasons and I can see why Jones might have decided against them. No way to justify leaving Ikitau out though. Jorgensen and him were both scheduled to return at the same time. Only one of them plays for Randwick and has a dad who is great mates with the national coach though.
53 Go to commentsBrayden Iose and Peter Lakai are very exciting Super Rugby players but are too short and too light to ever be a Test 8 vs South Africa, France, Ireland, and England, Lakai could potentially be a Test player at 7 if he is allowed to focus on 7 for Hurricanes.
5 Go to commentsPencils “Thomas du Toit” into possible 2027 Bok squad.
1 Go to commentsDon’t see why Harrison makes the bench. Jones can play at 10 if needed, and there is a good case for starting her there to begin with if testing combinations. That would leave room for Sing on the bench
1 Go to commentsWhat a load of old bull!
1 Go to commentsOf the rugby I’ve born witness to in my lifetime - 1990 to date - I recognize great players throughout those years. But I have no doubt the game and the players are on average better today. So I doubt going back further is going to prove me wrong. The technical components of the game, set pieces, scrums, kicks, kicks at goal. And in general tactics employed are far more efficient, accurate and polished. Professional athletes that have invested countless hours on being accurate. There is one nation though that may be fairly competitive in any era - and that for me is the all blacks. And New Zealand players in general. NZ produces startling athletes who have fantastic ball skills. And then the odd phenomenon like Brooke. Lomu. Mcaw. Carter. Better than comparing players and teams across eras - I’ve often had this thought - that it would be very interesting to have a version of the game that is closer to its original form. What would the game look like today if the rules were rolled back. Not rules that promote safety obviously - but rules like: - a try being worth 1 point and conversion 2 points. Hence the term “try”. Earning a try at goals. Would we see more attacking play? - no lifting in the lineouts. - rucks and break down laws in general. They looked like wrestling matches in bygone eras. I wonder what a game applying 1995 rules would look like with modern players. It may be a daft exercise, but it would make for an interesting spectacle celebrating “purer” forms of the game that roll back the rules dramatically by a few versions. Would we come to learn that some of the rules/combinations of the rules we see today have actually made the game less attractive? I’d love to see an exhibition match like that.
29 Go to commentsIrish Rugby CEO be texting Andy Farrell “Andy, i found our next Kiwi Irishman”
5 Go to commentsI certainly don’t miss drinking beers at 8am in the morning watching rugby games being played in NZ.
1 Go to commentsThis looks like a damage limitation exercise for Wales, keeping back some of their more effective players for the last 20/25 minutes to try and counter England’s fresh legs so the Red Roses don’t rack up a big score.
1 Go to commentsVery unlikely the Bulls will beat Leinster in Dublin. It would be different in Pretoria.
1 Go to commentsI think it is a dangerous path to go down to ban a player for the same period that a player they injured takes to recover. Players would be afraid to tackle anyone. I once tackled my best friend at school in a practice match and sprained his ankle. I paid for it by having to play fly-half instead of full-back for the rest of that season’s fixtures.
5 Go to commentsJust such a genuine good bloke…and probably the best all round player in his generation. Good guys do come first sometimes and he handled the W.Cup loss with great attitude.
2 Go to commentsWord in France is that he’s on the radar of a few Top14 clubs.
5 Go to commentsGet blocking Travis, this guy has styles and he’s gonna make a swift impact…!
1 Go to commentsWhat remorse? She claimed that her dangerous tackle wasn’t worthy of a red! She should be compensating the injured player for loss of earnings at the minimum. Her ban should include the recovery time of the injured player as well as the paltry 3 match ban.
5 Go to commentsArdie is a legend. Finished and klaar. Two things: “Yeah, yeah, I have had a few conversations with Razor just around feedback on my game and what I am doing well, what I need to improve on or work-ons. It’s kind of been minimal, mate, but it’s all that I need over here in terms of how to be better, how to get better and what I am doing well.” I hope he’s downplaying it - and that it’s not that “minimal”. The amount of communication and behind the scenes preparation the Bok coaches put into players - Rassie and co would be all over Ardie and being clear on what is expected of him. This stands out for me as something teams should really be looking at in terms of the boks success from a coaching point of view. And was surprised by the comment - “minimal”. In terms of the “debate” around Ireland and South Africa. Nice one Ardie. Indeed. There’s no debate.
2 Go to commentsThere’s a bit of depth there but realistically Australian players have a long way to go to now catch up. The game is moving on fast and Australia are falling behind. Australian sides still don’t priories the breakdown like they should, it’s a non-negotiable if you want to compete on the international stage. That goes for forwards and backs. The Australian team could have a back row that could make a difference but the problem is they don’t have a tight five that can do the business. Tupou is limited in defence, overweight and unfit and the locks are a long way from international standard. Frost is soft and Salakai-Loto is too small so that means they need a Valentini at 8 who has to do the hard graft so limits the effectiveness of the backrow. Schmidt really needs to get a hard working, tough tight 5 if he wants to get this team firing.
4 Go to commentsSorry Morgan you must have been the “go to for a quote” ex player this week. Its rnd 6 and there is plenty of time to cement a starting 15 and finishing 8 so I have no such concerns.
2 Go to commentsGreat read. I wish you had done this article on the ROAR.
2 Go to comments