Richards suspension caps a bloody affair
Roar Guru
By Pippinu, 19 Aug 2009 Pippinu is a Roar Guru
Related coverage
One of the more macabre incidents in world sport in recent times was brought to a judicial conclusion a couple of days back when Dean Richards, former England and Lions No. 8 and the former director of rugby for Harlequins was banned from coaching for three years after being found guilty of serial cheating.
For those unfamiliar with this story, it goes back to the closing minutes of the Heineken Cup quarter final against Leinster last season. With Quins trailing by a point, Tom Williams came off under the blood rule, which in turn allowed for the re-entry of goal kicker Nick Evans.
The cameras caught the Quins physio slipping Williams a little something, what we now know to be some sort of blood capsule, presumably ordered by mail from one of those joke shop ads at the back of Mad magazines, replete with whoopee cushion.
The club phsyio involved, who happens to be Australian, was rubbed out for two years. But the club doctor, who happens to be female, got away with a light rap over the knuckles.
A key aspect about this whole matter has been the premeditation involved (what we might loosely describe as match day planning), and the presentation of evidence that indicated it was not an isolated incident.
I’ve raised this case because:
1. It’s a bit out of left field
2. I have an interest in the various rules and philosophies that surround this whole area of interchange/substitution in the four football codes.
A question that arises for me immediately is whether it is worthwhile having such stringent rules of substitution if it means that coaches will think up ingenious ways of substituting players to meet an urgent tactical need out on the field.
It’s curious that well into last century, all four codes had fairly similar principles in terms of when and how often players could be substituted, but then rules started to diverge from the 1970s onwards, to where we are today, where all four codes have differing approaches in this respect.
The different rules are, in most cases, backed by different philosophies as to what the respective games entail.
I would like to you use this odd sporting story as a catalyst to explore people’s views on the different rules and philosophies that are currently at work in the four codes surrounding the interchange or substitution of players.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Victory beat Mariners with Kewell winner
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (7)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
Viscount Crouchback said | August 19th 2009 @ 3:43am | Report comment
Richards got what he deserved. I am a lifelong Quins supporter and my hearts bleeds to see this most blue-blooded of sporting institutions reduced to such an abject state. Half of my chums in the City have already deserted to Wasps or Sarries, and I suspect the other half shan’t be long in following.
I do not wish to be accused of snobbery, but does anyone really believe that this would have occurred if a sound chap like Simon Halliday had been in charge? Dean Richards, lest we forget, is a former policeman. His outlook on life is inherently lower middle-class: grasping, one-dimensional, and prone to investing undue importance in insignificant things (such as rugger).
Let this be a lesson to the Quins directors that a chap’s breeding is equally as important as his coaching resume, and that a club’s honour is infinitely more important than than the size of its trophy cabinet.
Colin N said | August 19th 2009 @ 4:19am | Report comment
“His outlook on life is inherently lower middle-class: grasping, one-dimensional, and prone to investing undue importance in insignificant things”
And you said you didn’t want to be accused of snobbery, how ironic.
Us lower-class Northern lot at would never do such a thing.
Dean Richards has done a fine job at Quins, but the report, I believe said, that he had been involved in four other similar cases at Quins, which if true, is rather shocking. So KO, there are clear suggestions that he was behind the incident.
Tom Williams apparently claimed that he was cut in the dressing room (probably by the banned club physio) by a scalpal, to cover up the ‘fake injury.’
LeftArmSpinner said | August 19th 2009 @ 9:35am | Report comment
viscount, it is not so much about breeding as how he was “brung” up. Lord Lucan was well bred, but it didnt help him.
Quins, can sink without trace as far as I am concerned. no love lost. If a club can have a personality, they were always a bit dodgy!!!!
onside said | August 19th 2009 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
VC
stop laughing
Knives Out said | August 19th 2009 @ 3:47am | Report comment
Richards stated that he didn’t know what had occurred but took the wrap for it anyway. Am I misinformed?
Viscount Crouchback said | August 19th 2009 @ 3:58am | Report comment
What, Tom Williams cooked up the whole plan himself?
Richards has stated that he wasn’t in the room after the match when Williams’s mouth was cut open with a scalpel to cover the tracks. But he absolutely must have inspired the plan in the first place.
Knives Out said | August 19th 2009 @ 4:04am | Report comment
I see. I did presume that but I thought that the response from Richards implied that he didn’t have anything to do with the scenario. Logic dictates otherwise but Richards has always been a straight talker so I am pretty surprised by his lack of admission (if he is guilty of course). The whole incident could have been avoided had that fool Williams decided not to wink in the general direction of absolutely everybody.
pothale said | August 20th 2009 @ 11:40am | Report comment
Richards got three years just for this specific incident. The RFU and other bodies are now going to investigate Williams claims’ that this happened in four matches specifically cited by Williams in his evidence who must have been feeling pretty pissed at having been dumped by the club, and therefore, decided to sing like a canary.
He’s young, but he participated in the scam.
And KO, I don’t believe the wink was what undid him. The Leinster officials protested the substitution, and when they saw it was because of a blood injury, the Leinster Doctor, Arthur Tanner, pursued the player down the tunnel, and banged on the dressing room door to demand to see the cut. Meanwhile, inside the dressing room, Williams’ mouth was cut to make it ‘real’.
I do not believe this is the first time this has occurred, but so blatant a scam, with a river of blood pouring out of his mouth, was a much greater giveaway to a trained doctor’s eye, than a wink, that was only picked up by camera in studio and examined after the event.
The doctor – who happens to be female – did not get off lightly. What her gender has to do with it, I’m not sure. However, the biggest problem for this inquiry is that her tenure and behaviour do not fall under their remit. She will be investigated by the relevant medical body. So I suspect another axe will fall. Unless the only part she played was in cutting the player’s mouth, when the physio and Richards realised they’d been nabbed, and people were going to pursue it.
Knives Out said | August 19th 2009 @ 4:05am | Report comment
..
Kurt said | August 19th 2009 @ 5:27am | Report comment
This story reminds me of one of only three games of Rugby Union I have played in my life, for Melbourne Uni back in the 90s. I had been talked into playing by a friend who said it would be ‘fun’ and after a couple of moderately enjoyable runs in third grade (this is Melbourne keep in mind, so you can probably visualise the less than stellar standards of third grade), I was promoted to second grade on the back of a terrible run of injuries and suspension in our first grade team. So there I was in the second row playing against some half-decent players including quite a few rather largish Pacific Islanders (I think it may have been against Kiwi Hawthorn). For the first half I was stamped on, run through, run over, and generally pummeled in a variety of none too pleasant ways. At half time the coach said to me ‘you’re struggling out there aren’t you Kurt’ to which I wanted to reply ‘You f***ing think!?’ but instead said something along the lines of ‘yes, just a bit’. This was back in the days when you could only come off for injuries so he told me to go down injured at the first break down in play in the second half and he would take me off. So a couple of minutes in I feigned an injury and said to the ref ‘it’s my knee, I’ve done my knee’. At exactly the same time the coach started shouting from the sidelines ‘it’s his back ref, he’s hurt his old back injury!’. The ref looked at me with a wry smile, took pity on me and told me to get off! Ironically if they’d left me out there for a few more minutes I would almost certainly have had to come off for a series of entirely legitimate injuries!
Pippinu said | August 19th 2009 @ 8:10am | Report comment
heh, heh – that’s a great story!!
But people – I want to explore the philosophy that underpins these rules – why is there a need for them to be so stringent?
mcxd said | August 19th 2009 @ 6:16am | Report comment
ahh good work Kurt, you were a brave man.
Pippinu said | August 19th 2009 @ 8:36am | Report comment
The video evidence was that the young Australian physio had slipped Williams the capsule.
It’s pretty clear to me that it’s unlikely that the physio would come prepared in such a manner unless it had been deliberated over by the coaching staff, and by implication, Richards himself (afterall, he would be the one making the call as to who should come off “injured”).
WCR
I honestly didn’t follow what you meant about his social background. This is a professional team sport played for high stakes and if there is one thing we know looking at team sports the world over, coaches from all backgronds will push the envelop, test the boundaries, etc to get a result.
Sometimes such prodding requires an interpretation of the rules, maybe even a change of rules (because all rules are actually full of grey areas that can be exploited by astute coaches). In other cases, like this one, the coach crosses the line in an extreme manner.
But all coaches work at the very edge of the rules – that’s how comparative advantages are often created by a team.
In this particular case, it got me thinking about the rules surrounding substitution, and whether they fit comfortably in the modern, professional era.
vinay verma said | August 19th 2009 @ 9:43am | Report comment
Rules are made by wise men. Rules are broken by even wiser men.
Pippinu said | August 19th 2009 @ 9:48am | Report comment
Very apt and very true!!
Knives Out said | August 19th 2009 @ 8:43am | Report comment
I recall an equally famous incident that occurred during the 98 or 99 season. Sir Clive Woodward wanted to remove Richard Cockerill from the field of play and so had a physio give the player a slight cut during the half-time break. Cockerill revealed this incident in his autobiography and yet nothing happened. Personally, I am all against this sort of stuff, just as I am props feigning injury so that uncontested scrums can occur, but this reaction is shockingly excessive and perfectly illustrates the reactionary ‘horse has bolted’ attitude of the contemporary rugby authorities.
Pippinu said | August 19th 2009 @ 8:46am | Report comment
Knives
my first hand knowledge (from inside the Brumbies camp) is that this getting cut up business is not limited to 10 years ago.
And I suspect many of you out there would know far more than I do.