The 'financial damage' submission Erasmus made at sanction hearing
Rassie Erasmus opted not to address the judicial committee during the sanction hearing that resulted in his suspension this week, the Springboks director of rugby instead providing a short statement that included details on the financial damage he would suffer if he was suspended.
Erasmus was ultimately suspended from all rugby with immediate effect on Wednesday for a period of two months. He was also banned from any involvement on a matchday until September 30 next year, while SA Rugby must pay a fine of £20,000. Both Erasmus and SA Rugby must also apologise for their actions.
Both sanctioned parties have since stated they will exercise their right to appeal. In the meantime, the 80-page written judgment from the hearing has provided a tantalising insight into what unfolded at the hearing where the judicial committee were invited on behalf of Springboks director Erasmus to only fine but not suspend him.
On page 45 of the written judgment, the judicial committee outlined the evidence and submissions by Erasmus. It read: “We read and had appropriate regard to a short statement from Rassie Erasmus. He elected not to address us during the sanction hearing.
“The statement contained no acceptance of fault, no apology or any acknowledgement of the effect on Nic Berry. Therein he said: ‘The sensitive and complicated racial component could not sufficiently be dealt with within the limited time allowed and the constraints of the written submission and I requested an indulgence to make oral submissions in supplementation’.
The written judgment in the Rassie Erasmus hearing has detailed a disputed phone call between two of World Rugby's top referees #Springboks #rassieerasmus
https://t.co/uu9ATEVh3I— RugbyPass (@RugbyPass) November 18, 2021
“In the said statement he addressed the financial damage he would suffer if he was suspended. To that end, he provided us with the details of his performance and incentive-based, including win, bonuses. We had regard to that information.
“In written submissions filed on his behalf (the content of which we had full regard to) it was submitted that he has an ‘unblemished career record’ exceeding 25 years and has never been charged with misconduct, a breach of World Rugby’s regulations or code of conduct nor accused of or charged with conduct or activity that brought the game into disrepute.
“We were invited to consider his ‘passionate and emotional reaction to what he perceived to be the disrespectful treatment of the black Springbok captain, should be understood in the context of a unique, extremely sensitive and very complex South African racial landscape’.
“We were invited to fine him. It was submitted that a suspension will ‘undoubtedly be harmful to the Springbok squad of players’. We also had appropriate regard to SARU’s submission that Rassie Erasmus should not be suspended.
“It was submitted that such was a ‘very blunt tool, which has the potential to damage innocent parties’… In the written submissions filed on his behalf, it is said that ‘the accusations against him and the disciplinary process has caused his family immense distress and harmed his reputation significantly’. This is said to be a ‘severe punishment’ for Rassie Erasmus. With respect, it is wrong.
“The accusation and process are the product of his own conduct. He brought the proceedings on himself. He could have shortened them radically by accepting his misconduct. However, we do recognise what may be seen as a fall from grace for him, having led his country’s senior men’s team with such distinction including at RWC 2019.”
It added about the Springboks boss: “A striking feature of Rassie Erasmus’ evidence, and the submissions made in mitigation, is the failure to acknowledge that any part of the content of the video was abusive, insulting and/or offensive. Further, there has been no apology to Nic Berry.
“That is a matter for Rassie Erasmus and SA Rugby. We do not punish him for that, nor for the fact he and SARU fought the case. That was their right. However, it deprives him of the mitigation an acknowledgement of fault and an apology would otherwise have afforded.”
The written judgment contained the entire clip by clip reply that Berry, the first Lions Test referee, sent to Springboks boss Erasmus in July…#Springboks
https://t.co/EjQlcpZ9g8— RugbyPass (@RugbyPass) November 18, 2021
Comments on RugbyPass
Very 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.
2 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.
3 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 commentsThe current AB coaching team is basically the Crusaders so it smacks of wanting their familiar leaders around. This is not a good look for the future of the ABs or the younger players in Super working their way up the player ladder. Razor is touted as innovative, forward looking but his early moves look like insecurity and insular, provincial thinking. He is the AB's coach not the Golden Oldies.
10 Go to commentsSimple reason for wanting him back. Robertson wants him as captain. Otherwise he wouldn’t be bothering chasing him. Not enough reason to come back just to mentor.
10 Go to commentsI had not considered this topic like this at all, brilliant read. I had been looking at his record at the Waratahs and thought it odd the Crusaders appointed him, then couple that with all that experience and talent departing and boom. They’ve got some great talent developing though, and in all honesty I don’t think anyone would be over confident taking them on in a playoff match, no matter how poor the first half of their season was. I think they can pull a game out of their ass when it counts.
2 Go to commentsNot a bad list but not Porecki and not Donaldson. Not because they are Tahs, or Ex Tahs, they are just not good enough. Edmed should be ahead. Far more potential. Wilson should be 8 and Valentini 6. Wilson needs to be told by his father and his coach, stop bloody running in to brick wall defence. You’re not playing under the genius Thorn any more. He’s a fantastic angle runner. The young new 8 from the Brumbies looks really good too. The Lonegrans are just too small for international rugby as is Paisami, as is Hamish Stewart at 12. Both great at Super Rugby level. Stewart could have been a great 10 if not for Brad Thorn. Uru should be there and so should Tupou. Tupou just needs good Australian coaching which he hasn’t been getting. I don’t think Schmidt will excite him.
3 Go to commentsIf he wants to come back then he should. He will be a major asset to the younger locks and could easily be played as an impact player off the bench coming on in the last 30. He is fit, strong and capable and has all the experience to make up for any loss in physical prowess. He could also be brought back with a view to coaching within the structures one day. Duane Vermeulen played until he was 37 or 38. He is now a roaming coach within the South African coaching structures. He was valuable in the last world cup and has been a major influence on Jasper Wiese and other young players which has helped and accelerated their development and growth. Whitelock could do the exact same thing for NZ
10 Go to commentsBrett Excellent words… finally someone (other than DC) has noted that Hanigan is very hard and very good at doing what Backrow should do… his performance via the Drua sauna was quite daunting for those on the other side… very high tackle count… carries with good end result… constant threat to make a good 20-25 meters with those long legs… providing his mass effectively to crunching the Drua pack… Finally he is returning to quality form… way to much injury time over the last 2 years… smart-strong-competent in his skills… caught every lineout throw aimed at him and delivered clean pass to whoever was down below… and he worked hard for the whole 80 minutes… Ned has to be in the top 5 for backrow honors… He knows what is required as he has been there before…
20 Go to commentsI think Sam Whitelock should not touch a return with a bargepole. He went out on a high, playing in the RWC Final. He would be coming back into a team that will be weaker than last years, and might even be struggling to win games, especially against the Boks. Stay in France, enjoy another year with Pau, playing alongside his brother.
10 Go to commentsRyan Coxon has been very impressive considering he was signed by WF as injury cover whilst Uru has been a standout for QR, surprised neither of those mentioned
3 Go to commentsIt’s the massive value he brings with regard team culture/values, preparation, etc. Can’t buy that. I’m hoping to see the young locks get their chance in the big games though.
10 Go to commentsAll good, Gregor, except that you neglected to mention Sam Darry amongst that talented pool of locks. In fact, given Hannah’s inexperience and the fact that Holland won’t be eligible until next year, Lord and Darry might be the frontrunners this year, to join Barrett, Tuipoluto, Va’ii and possibly Whitelock. In fact there might be room for all of them if Barrett played 6 (like Ollie Chessum).
10 Go to comments