It's bloody Hell for Harlequins as Williams is banned

Andy As a Quins STH I am not sure it is the end of the story. I suspect the RFU will look into the four previous incidents and may carry out an indepth research into other potential incidents including the blood substitution of Hipkiss by Duprey in the recent match between Leicester and Cardiff which was decided by a penalty shoot out. Dupry who was Leicester best kicker having been substituted earlier in the game. I also feel that the IRB should look at the enitire question of substitution in a worldwide context, with props feigning injuries to move to "uncontested scrums"., as an example. Is there the need for independent assessment of injuries to avoid such examples of gamesmanship or does Union need to move to the rolling substitutions in League.

So: - Richards banned from coaching for three years - Williams' ban reduced from 12 months to 4 months - Brennan (team physio) banned for two years - team doctor let off because the panel "lacked jurisdiction" - team fine increased from €250,000 to €300,000 to be paid in full - but, the committee decided not to expel 'Quins from next season's Heineken Cup. Richards and Brennan had fabricated a "blood injury" four previous times in non ERC tournaments. "I had to hold my hands up" - Richards "I hope, as a result of this episode, that no players are put in such a compromising position. If they are I hope they tell the truth, as I wish I had done from the outset" - Williams .

Pothale I agree I think the ERC will throw the book at Quins. The fundamental problem is that they have been caught. It is interesting that has been going on for some time. "The Draconian fall-out since the Harlequins fake blood controversy, including the resignation of Dean Richards and a year-long ban for Tom Williams, suggests such cheating has never been attempted before in Rugby Union. Yet, England icon Lawrence Dallaglio's autobiography casually describes how Bath used the same scam with the aid of tomato ketchup for a blood substitution to ensure kicker Jon Callard got on the field in a league match to kick conversion points against Dallaglio's Wasps in 1997. Dallaglio described the incident as 'fair play to Bath, they bent the rules. But hey-ho, you do what you have to do to win' " "Sport - Rugby Union - Players 'using fake blood' . Last updated: 23 Sep 2001 oDick Best claims players are using fake blood to break rugby's rules on blood-bin replacements.. Wasps' director of rugby Nigel Melville agreed with Best's comments. news.bbc.co.uk/sport/hi/english/rugby_union/news.../1559253.stm" Incidentl;y Nigel Neville is now CEO American rugby.

Just thought I'd raise this topic again with the news that Dean Richards has resigned from the club. Williams is due to give evidence in his appeal against his one-year ban, and the rumour is that he will testify that he was given a blood capsule to hide in his sock and use it an appropriate moment. Besides Richards, it looks like a few more heads will roll before this one is finished.

Pothale To be correct, the rumour was that TW had this mouth stitched post match. To date I have not seen anything to counter that view. Indeed the judgement is even more perplexing. The management and medical staff of Quins have been cleared of any wrongdoing including the physio who attended TW on the pitch. There was a 2 to 1 majority decision from which TW's ban and Quins fine was deliberated. The written judgement should make interesting reading. By the way the ERC have indicated the judgement will be ready in 14 days whereas the RFU turn round their written judgements in 24/48 hours. TW is very popular at Quins and last season he was one of the players of the season. He is also Quins rep on the PRA, (Professional Rugby Association) which indicates the level of support he has from his fellow professionals. Indeed the PRA have been very outspoken about the ban. Personally I think the ERC have an agenda and want to lay down a marker. I have no difficulty with severe punishments including a ban from European competition but there appear to be too many inconsistencies in this judgement, perhaps the written judgement will reveal all? By the way, the embarrassmnet is that Quins might have benn involved in skullduggery, there is quite a strong lobby for Dean Richards to be sacked if Quins are guilty.

I seem to recall Ian you protesting about Williams being accused of cheating and said that the pictures of leaving the field showed he was bleeding. It was all much ado about nothing. What's your view now? The same pictorial evidence is available. Is your embarrassment based on him being caught, found guilty or what?

I think that rugby is cyclical as well. No team tends to dominate for a period longer than 4 years.

As a Quins STH I find this incident acutely embarrassing and judging from posts on Quins blogs so do many other fans. I was at the game and after some deliberation by the officials which was longer than shown on the You Tube clip, the substitution was allowed. However, the eventual judgement by the panel on a majority decision of 2 to 1 raises a number of questions of which the greatest how could the management and the medical team of Quins be cleared, when Tom Williams was on the bench for the whole match did not move from the bench and only came onto the field when Malone was substituted after a hamstring injury. During the period he was on the field he was tackled and if the capsule was in his sock why did it not burst. I think Brian Moore’s article in the Daily Telegraph makes interesting reading. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/5888401/Tom-Williams-made-the-fall-guy-at-Harlequins-in-misguided-ERC-crackdown.html Quins are waiting for the written judgement before they decide whether to appeal. However the incident does raise more serious issues about substitutions and how teams in the past have manipulated the situation to their advantage. We are all familiar with the withdrawal of a prop to go to uncontested scrums, the “injury “sustained by the Boks prop to get Smit back onto the field of play during a Lions test, when he had already been substituted. Perhaps Union should follow the lead of League in allowing a limited number of substitutions in the game regardless of the reason.

Lets hope Harlequins pay for his 12mnth holiday.

Certainly, the player is guilty, but surly the instigator of a plan must be equally guilty. What happens to a payer who refuses to follow the game plan?

Of course they will hammer the player, as he is culpable. If he were to rip the head off an opposition player on the coach's suggestion, who would get binned or banned? At the end of the player is the culprit ,not the instigator (in law at least, if not morally).

Doger - perhaps this is what the judiciary are after .... they've no real proof to level at the coaching staff - so they'll hammer the player initially to force their hand ... in the end it is cheating and the people behind the action need to stand up and take responsibilty and when/if they do the book should be thrown at them

As I understand it half of that fine is suspended so it’s not as big as it first appears. But my opinion is that the judiciary has in fact put it’s self into a very stupid position. Are we really meant to believe that Williams real wondered into a joke shop and purchased a blood capsule and then on a wime decides to play Dracula five minutes from full time. I actually feel sorry for him, poor sod. If it’s good enough for players to be carpeted for off field behavior, then it is also high time that coaches take responsibility for cynically manipulating the laws of the game. I call it cheating.

I saw this on the news. I loved the way Williams, looking like Dracula, give a quick little wink as he was dragged off. This verdict has to be the equivalent of the ERC playing along with the joke, right? Or maybe this is the ERC's way of reducing the number of South Africans playing in Europe. I mean, Schalk Burger has to be sitting at home thinking "Wow, if this guy gets a year for a bit of fake blood, what on earth would I get for an eye gouge?"

Just to clarify, the club was also fined 250,000 euros. The penalty for the player does seem a little disproportionate, other than the evidence indicating premeditation and they are perhaps intent on sending a strong message. What would folk suggest was the appropriate balance of penalty?

This is far from the first time that the Blood bin charade has been used. I witnessed an incident first hand at a club game some years ago. I was told the script a day before the game and sure enough, down went the player, on came the phyiso and off went the player for a breather. The coach who orchestrated that has now moved on to greater things

I was convinced at the time, as I remain convinced now, that the substitution of Williams was 'arranged'. The pictures of him bleeding from the mouth always looked suspicious to me for amount of blood that he 'kept' in his mouth, as opposed to spitting it out as any sports player would, along with the quite visible and deliberate wink to his bench is what I based this view on. How Williams was the only one to be charged defies logic for me. And I don't know how they are going to sustain the charge against any appeal by the club, since anyone else who would have to have been involved in some way, was not charged or else found not guilty. The only thing that might occur is that the club decide for whatever reason not to appeal the charge. In which case, I will believe that a behind-the-scenes deal was done. Williams takes the fall and club escape. Whatever about the charges made or not made, there is definitely something wrong here - but unfortunately I suspect the real truth and culprits will not be uncovered.

If you liked cricket you would not have the time to write on rugby - Agree on the aura and the overachieving. Most of our good history was off the back of two provinces that became three in the end. Now we are heading for five ans there is a players market where there are too many spots and the quality has gone down. It used to be a bit of a closed shop and that gave the Wallabies strength despite the frustration of those that missed out - Now we give out caps like lollies and there is not enough struggle to get there. Now we are adopting a brand of rugby that suited the tough south island types in NZ but actually detracts from our point of difference. We used to be admired for winning 30% possesion but outplaying the opposition with it using skill, flair and innovation. Now we dont use 1st phase ball with any sophistication, pay field position and cant win when our prop gets penalised three times in the scrum it would seem. I like the pragmatism of the Argies, South Africa is underperforming and poorly coached for the talent on the field and the Kiwis do it on pride but the cupboard is a bit bare - happens from time to time.

I like Argentina, Bonza, & the Pacific Islands, of course. Of the big three I tend to have phases. When I first began to really appreciate rugby it was 1999 and Australia were the dominant side. I thought they were fantastic, but John O'Neill has managed to turn me off Australian rugby a little bit, childish as that sounds. I used to perceive Australia as tough, gritty and overachieving, a nation who were trendsetters in the game of union. Now I think the Wallabies are a bit soft, frankly. They don't have the same aura as I recall from my teenage years. I like New Zealand but that's more to do with some of the rugby the All Blacks have played over the past few years. I think that Henry has achieved a lot that goes unrecognised. South Africa is a funny rugby nation. The 1997 Lions tour developed a love of the Springboks that I held until 2000(ish). It's hard to respect a nation that is notorious for such low acts of foul play, and it's hard to respect that inherent arrogance. Since 2007 I've always maintained that the Springboks aren't anything special and the responses I've gathered have basically stated that I had an anti-SA agenda and disliked the nation due to apartheid. That says everything for me. Over the past few years it has been one disaster after another in SA, and somebody else is always to blame, and we saw that with the Bakkies Botha protest. That attitude is not worth persevering with. I'm not a cricket fan, btw. So you don't have to worry about any banter from me.

Not happy to belt us in the cricket you have to slap us around on this site - the Scottish exception is interesting - You didn't mention a soft spot for anything South of the equator.