Roar Rookie
Joined June 2015
5.5k
Views
3
Published
8
Comments
Published
Comments
I am a Judicial Officer for a rugby federation in the Middle East and Africa and recently facilitated a disciplinary hearing regarding an alleged…
I am a judicial officer for one of the Middle East Rugby federations and so, most weeks during the Rugby season over here, I…
I am sick of the persistent public thanking of gods by Super Rugby players whenever they score a try. Typically there is a look…
We are really going into the weeds here, but WR Regulation 18.4.3 A provides that a ‘Union or Association which considers another Union or Association to have so conducted itself as to be in breach of these Regulations or the Bye-Laws or to have committed an offence under Regulation 18.1.1(a) to (e), may make complaint of such conduct to the [WR] CEO.
In addition, WR Regulation 18.4.4 provides that ‘The [WR] Council or CEO may, whether at the request of a Union, Association, or of its own motion, initiate an enquiry into any alleged, or apparent breach of the Bye-Laws and/or Regulations or alleged offences under Regulation 18.1.1(a) to (e) [which includes the code of conduct obligation].‘
So technically, WR could be forced by another union or association to at least consider intervening, if that union or association believes that RA’s conduct when dealing with Folau’s misconduct was in breach of the regulations. Therefore, you may be correct that WR may not want to consider this misconduct but there are probably avenues through which other parties could force a WR review.
If Rugby Australia doesn’t successfully expel Folau, World Rugby have to
That’s a reasonable assumption to make, but host unions must sign up to the WR Regulations, including the code of conduct, and are obliged to enforce them. If they don’t, they would potentially be subject to WR intervention.
If Rugby Australia doesn’t successfully expel Folau, World Rugby have to
— COMMENT DELETED —
If Rugby Australia doesn’t successfully expel Folau, World Rugby have to
WR Regulation 17, which deals with acts of foul play, provides that ‘A Player suspended from playing the Game shall be suspended from participating in any Match at any level during the period of his suspension.’ I couldn’t find a similar provision regarding expulsion, but I think a similar principle would apply, so he wouldn’t be able to play any WR sanctioned Match, but could probably play some touch football with his church mates. Assuming he is expelled, we should also consider that other sport administrators may also recognise his expulsion and adopt it as well. The WR Regulations explicitly contemplate this scenario for other sports and the NRL has already indicated it would not license him.
If Rugby Australia doesn’t successfully expel Folau, World Rugby have to
From a local union perspective, I would treat it the same way. WR would have the right to intervene.
If Rugby Australia doesn’t successfully expel Folau, World Rugby have to
Totally agree with the observations regarding Phipps’ passing from the ruck. He is always taking that extra half step, therefore, losing time and pace.
Chiefs show small-backs masterclass against the Brumbies
I would have thought that with all PI players’ pre and post-match prayers, post-try finger waving to the heavens, and general religiousness, they wouldn’t need to worry about post-colonialism and the diablo who is obviously driving this injustice.
Colonialism revisited at the Rugby World Cup
Spot on Wally.
Michael Hooper needs to show some respect