Besides a new sponsor, a new name and some new teams, what changes have been made to the Disciplinary code of the Rabo Pro 12 league? What changes  can players  expect in the sanction they get when cited, sin binned or sent off in 2012?  The optics in any event have certainly changed, for the better.

The event organisers are acutely conscious of the historical charge that home unions who administer discipline have  a conflict of interest when disciplining their international stars. The John Hayes stamping suspension in 2009 is as good an example as any. Munster prop John Hayes was handed down a six week suspension for stamping on the head of Cian Healy during a match between Leinster and Munster in the then Magners League match at the RDS in October 2009. This was a stamp to the forehead of Cian Healy so it should have been considered the higher end for the offence of “stamping an opponent”. The reason why it should be considered high end  is obvious: -  the danger to the skull of a player;  the long term damage that  may be caused. Also the stamping on someone’s head is a physically cowardly act where the victim is defenceless on the ground. The maximum suspension that could have handed down was 52 weeks and the minimum was 2 weeks. The Disciplinary Committee, which was composed of IRFU appointees issued  handed down a six week suspension on Hayes,  which conveniently expired on 14 November, the day before Ireland took on Australia in Croke Park on 15 November 2009, a game in which John Hayes participated in. Despite the lenient suspension Hayes appealed the decision to the Appeals Committee (again all IRFU appointees) which reduced the suspension to 5 weeks. You can now appreciate why, just from this example, there has always been an unspoken suspicion that home unions have a conflict of interest when imposing suspensions on international players in what is essentially an international league.

It follows that the event organisers of the Rabo Pro 12 have taken the opportunity in the revised 2011/12 disciplinary rules for the tournament to address the question mark over the independence of the disciplinary infrastructure of the league.  They did this by  imposing greater ‘step in’ rights where presumably they could intervene where certain incidents were not being investigated or certain disciplinary officials appointed could be vetoed.

1. Referral of Misconduct

Under the 2010/2011 rules it was clear that although a misconduct matter could be referred by a Union, Club,  disciplinary committee, an appeal committee or a Tournament Director  to the Disciplinary Officer and the Disciplinary Officer would then have sole discretion as to whether to investigate the matter and/or bring a Misconduct complaint (or take any other action) under the Disciplinary rules.

Whilst the referral system still continues, it appears that the discretion of the Disciplinary Officer to decide if misconduct is to be prosecuted  has  been diluted under the 2011/12 rules because now the Board of Celtic Rugby may direct the Disciplinary Officer to investigate a matter and/or bring a Misconduct Complaint. 

2. Temporary suspensions

Perhaps the most significant changes under the 2011/2012 Disciplinary Rules concern the issue of temporary suspensions imposed on players. 

Under the 2010/2011 rules the Disciplinary Committee were obliged to impose a one week  suspension on player who  had three “sin-bins” in the one season.  Now however the Disciplinary Committee have been afforded discretion to decide how long or indeed short the suspension should be.

The 2011/2012 rules have brought further clarity to the issue of temporary suspensions. The rules state that when a player serves a one week suspension for having received three sin bins  his slate is then wiped clean. If the player is to receive another one week suspension he must then have to accumulate  another separate three sin bins in the same season.

The rules also clarified that a player does not carry any record of sin bins from one season to the next. Each player starts the new season with a clean slate.

3. Citing Commissioner appointment

Historically the host Union was responsible for appointing a Citing Commissioner for each match played.  Whereas that provision stays intact under the new rules, Celtic Rugby are afforded  the right to determine the choice of Citing Commissioner as it sees fit.

In summary players, clubs and their unions in the Rabo Pro 12 can expect a more robust and impartial disciplinary system where responsibility for the administration of justice will be increasingly removed from the  home unions. The Board of Celtic Rugby have decided finally  that  ‘Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done’.

Disclaimer
This publication is for guidance purposes only. It does not constitute legal or professional advice. No liability is accepted by Leman Solicitors for any action taken or not taken in reliance on the information set out in this publication. Professional or legal advice should be obtained before taking or refraining from any action as a result of the contents of this publication. Any and all information is subject to change.