Northern Edition
Select Edition
Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Scots have had legal opinion - from a leading QC - that challenges World Rugby's participation agreement interpretation

Scottish Rugby Union chief executive Mark Dodson says he will not allow Scotland to become the World Cup’s “collateral damage” as he vowed to fight off any moves to cancel Sunday’s vital clash with Japan. World Rugby has been forced to call off two games on Saturday as Super Typhoon Hagibis prepares to wreak havoc across Japan’s eastern coast.

ADVERTISEMENT

A decision on whether the Scots’ win-or-bust final Pool A game with the hosts goes ahead will be made on the morning of the game but Dodson told BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme that the showdown should either be moved to an alternative venue or delayed until after the storm passes.

World Rugby has already said it will not budge on tournament rules which state pool matches can only be played on their scheduled dates but Murrayfield bosses are understood to believe clauses relating to “force majeure” measures in the competition guidelines could allow room for manoeuvre.

Dodson said: “My view is that we’re not going to let Scotland be the collateral damage for a decision that was taken in haste. There’s alternative (venues) around Japan. The point to me, we are talking about now is not whether the game will take place on Sunday, that will be a purely meteorological issue. The issue will be if it can’t take place then we’re really, really pressing the point that we need to have to get this game delayed 24 hours later.”

And Dodson confirmed the SRU are exploring legal options to ensure the game goes ahead. He said: “The first is and most important is that we look after the safety of the general public. The second thing is for World Rugby to just simply state that the game has to be cancelled goes against the whole sporting integrity of the tournament.

(Continue reading below…)

Video Spacer

“We have been preparing for this tournament now for four years, the guys have had over 100 days in camp, we’ve played games already and the fourth game in this particular case is pivotal.

“We’ve had consistent dialogue since the last three or four days around this with senior people at World Rugby, but World Rugby seem to be determined to stick to its plan that the match is either played on Sunday or indeed it is cancelled, and to have it cancelled and have our ability to progress from this group put at peril, we believe is absolutely unacceptable.

ADVERTISEMENT

“World Rugby is pointing us back to the participation agreement. We’ve had legal opinion – from a leading QC – that challenges World Rugby’s interpretation.

“We don’t know that (it’s too late) – we have to challenge it. But we should be talking about this from a rugby perspective, this is about the game and the rugby supporters across the world are absolutely astounded at this rigidity from World Rugby. The common sense approach to this is to play the game 24 hours later on perfect safety where we can make sure that the pool stages are completed, and the sporting integrity of the tournament remains intact.”

– Press Association 

WATCH: The moment when two World Cup matches were officially cancelled and Scotland’s match placed in jeopardy

Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 1 hour ago
Ex-Wallaby laughs off claims Bath are amongst the best in the world

I ultimately don’t care who the best club team in the world is, so yeah, lets agree to disagree on that.


I would appreciate clarity on a couple of things though:

Where did I contradict myself?

Saying “Trophies matter. They matter a lot. But so does winning games. So does making finals.” is entirely compatible with ranking a team as the best - over an extended period - when they have won more games and made more finals than other comparable teams. It would be contradictory for me to say “Trophies matter. They matter a lot. But so does winning games. So does making finals.” and then completely ignore Leinster record of winning games and making finals.


“You can get frustrated and say I am not reading what you write, but when you quote me, then your first line is to say thats true (what I wrote), but by the end of the paragraph have stated something different, thats where you contradict yourself.”

What you said (that I think trophies matter) is true, in that I said “Trophies matter. They matter a lot. But so does winning games. So does making finals.”. Do you understand that Leinster won more games and made more finals than any other (URC-based) team did under the period under consideration?


“Pointless comparison on Blackburn and Tottenham to this discussion as no-one includes them on a list of the best club. I would say that Blackburns title season was better than anything Tottenham have done in the Premier League. My reference to the league was that the team who finished second over two seasons are not better than the two other teams who did win the league each time. One of the best - of course, but not the best, which is relevant to my point here about Leinster, not comparing teams who won 30 years ago against a team that never won.”

I really don’t understand why you would think that this is irrelevant. You seem to be saying that winning trophies is the only thing that matters when assessing who is the best, but doesn’t matter at all when assessing who is 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc.


“What I referred to in my Leinster wouldn’t say the were the best is your post earlier where you said Leinster were the best overall. You said that in two separate posts. Seasons dont work like that, they are individual. Unless the same team keeps winning then you can say they were the best over a period of time and group them, but thats not the case here.”

Well then we’ve just been talking at cross purposes. In that my position (that Leinster were the best team overall in 2022-2024) was pretty clear, and you just decided to respond to a different point (whether Leinster were the best team individually in particular years) essentially making the entire discussion completely pointless. I guess if you think that trophies are the only thing that matters then it makes sense to see the season as an individual event that culminates in a trophy (or not), whereas because I believe that trophies matter a lot, but that so does winning matches and making finals, it makes it easier for me to consider quality over an extended period.

24 Go to comments
M
MT 1 hour ago
Ex-Wallaby laughs off claims Bath are amongst the best in the world

As I said in one of my first replies to you - we can agree to disagree. If you want to leave it no problem. I completely disagree with your ranking of Leinster as the best team in the world. Now you have said you will change it if Bordeaux win the Top 14. Well as Leinster themselves prioritise the CC over the URC and Bordeaux won the CC, how are they not ranked higher by you? Are Leinster one of the best teams, yeah - never said they weren’t. But not the very best team, as the very best team have trophies to show for their seasons. They matter when you discuss the very best.


You can get frustrated and say I am not reading what you write, but when you quote me, then your first line is to say thats true (what I wrote), but by the end of the paragraph have stated something different, thats where you contradict yourself. Just so we are clear, you said you would too on my statement that I would rather be a fan of a team that won a trophy over the three seasons, but end the paragraph saying you would rather be a fan of the team that won the most matches but didn’t win a trophy. Both cant be true. Thats one example of where you contradict yourself.


Pointless comparison on Blackburn and Tottenham to this discussion as no-one includes them on a list of the best club. I would say that Blackburns title season was better than anything Tottenham have done in the Premier League. My reference to the league was that the team who finished second over two seasons are not better than the two other teams who did win the league each time. One of the best - of course, but not the best, which is relevant to my point here about Leinster, not comparing teams who won 30 years ago against a team that never won.


What I referred to in my Leinster wouldn’t say the were the best is your post earlier where you said Leinster were the best overall. You said that in two separate posts. Seasons dont work like that, they are individual. Unless the same team keeps winning then you can say they were the best over a period of time and group them, but thats not the case here.

24 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Why it's Guy Pepper's time to come of age on England's summer voyage Why it's Guy Pepper's time to come of age on England's summer voyage
Search