This cite may save someone's sight
Anglesea insists on his innocence but case could be catalyst for overhaul of entire disciplinary system
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.As Sale prepare to lodge an appeal to the Rugby Football Union against the 12-month ban on Peter Anglesea, the case raises the first test of the nature of the joint venture between the Union, the clubs and the players. The Professional Rugby Players' Association (PRA), a partner in the new accord, want an inquiry not just into the Anglesea affair but the whole disciplinary procedure.
"There are discrepancies and inconsistencies," Damian Hopley, head of the PRA, said. "A footballer got six months for drop-kicking a spectator, others get three months for drug abuse and here we have a player with no record of skulduggery having his livelihood threatened. This is a unique case and it throws up wider issues. What worries us is whether players are being found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt."
It's a question bothering Sale. They are consulting a barrister to prepare Anglesea's appeal next week against the sentence delivered by an RFU tribunal who found the flanker guilty of eye-gouging Jon Dunbar in the Premiership match against Newcastle.
"If necessary we'll take this to the highest court in the land," Brian Kennedy, the Sale owner, said. "We are determined to clear the name of Pete Anglesea. His career, reputation and livelihood have been jeopardised. We are absolutely convinced of his innocence."
The Super-12 series in the southern hemisphere has independent citing commissioners and the RFU are now looking at adopting a similar policy for the Premiership which would take the matter out of the hands of the clubs. Hopley said he would welcome such a move but added: "As it stands the panels that deal with players consist of three representatives from the RFU. We'd like to see one from the RFU, one from the clubs and one from the players' association."
On 8 September Heywood Road was full for the visit of Newcastle who the previous week had defeated Leicester. "Losing to Sale,'' Rob Andrew, Newcastle's director of rugby had declared, "would be like England losing to Albania at football.'' As Sale, with Anglesea among the try scorers, went on to record an impressive victory, the man on the tannoy announced: "Albania 37 Newcastle 11.''
In the second minute Dunbar went off for treatment to a facial injury and returned after 11 minutes. Andrew did not attend the press conference, his place being taken by Steve Bates who made no reference to Dunbar or the manner of his injury. A few days later Newcastle cited Anglesea for gouging. "We were stunned by the citing and stunned by the outcome," Kennedy said. On 24 September at the Holiday Inn in Leeds a three-man tribunal, John Spencer, chairman, with John Owen and Robin Wannop, found Anglesea guilty and banned him for a year with immediate effect. Apart from listening to the views of the players, they studied a video (tapes are commissioned by the RFU at all Premier games) and read a medical report.
"Newcastle would not release the doctor's evidence prior to the hearing," Kennedy said. "It is laughable. We now have that report and it will form part of a comprehensive case for the appeal."
Dunbar sustained minor eye and nose injuries which are said to be commensurate with gouging. "The film shows Anglesea going into a ruck and competing for the ball and that's it," maintains Kennedy. "You don't see any fingers in any eyes."
Andrew sees it very differently. "I was not prepared to sweep the matter under the carpet," the former England stand-off said. "It was a barbaric act inflicted on a defenceless player. Rugby is a tough game and no one knows that better than me but three things are unacceptable – biting, gouging and kicking in the head."
The punishment for gouging is anything from 12 months to three years, so Anglesea got the minimum. In 1998 Kevin Yates, the England prop then with Bath and now with Sale, was convicted of ear-biting and banned for six months. Yates, who has always maintained his innocence, said he would have taken it to the High Court but for lack of funds. The cause célèbre was one of the reasons for the formation of the players' association. "Gouging is very difficult to prove," Yates said. "I've been in matches against the French where I've gone into a ruck and come out with both contact lenses missing."
Last season Martin Johnson, the England captain, was cited by Saracens for putting the knee into Duncan McRae who had a lengthy lay-off. Johnson was dealt with leniently and his sentence expired on the eve of England's match with Wales. Earlier this month when Leicester's Austin Healey was found to have brought the game into disrepute during the Lions' tour to Australia, Johnson, also the captain of the Lions and Leicester, served on the panel that heard the case. Healey was fined £2,500.
To cite or not to cite is in the eye of the beholder but there are external factors, not least the relationship between the clubs involved. Last week Joe Worsley, the Wasps and England flanker, left the Stoop during the game against Harlequins to have six stitches inserted in his scrotum after being rucked off the ball. The "prime suspect" was Jason Leonard, the veteran Quins and England prop, but Nigel Melville, the Wasps director of rugby, described the incident as "a pure accident".
One of the most blatant examples of gouging came in the last World Cup when Garin Jenkins, the Wales hooker, was a victim against Argentina. Although a photographer snapped the scene no action was taken because officials claimed they could not identify the culprit.
Anglesea is the first Englishman to be banned for gouging but not the first player. Richard Nones, the Colomiers prop, was banned for two years for an offence against Sven Cronk during a Heineken Cup match at Pontypridd in 1999. The referee Jim Fleming was alerted by a touch judge and Nones was sent off. That evening a video was studied by officials in the Colomiers team coach because no other facility was available.
Colomiers appealed to the French Federation, the French Olympic Committee and European Rugby Cup Ltd but to no avail. After a seven-month process, the French Federation said that Nones, then aged 30, could play in the domestic championship but not in Europe. Colomiers honoured the player's contract but did not renew it and Nones, whose ban officially expires in December, dropped out of top-flight rugby to play for Tournefeuille in the third division. The name of the club means "turning over a new leaf". "His career was effectively finished," Maurice Guibert, the Colomiers chief executive, said. "He suffered financially and psychologically." Anglesea, who will be 30 next month, is a journeyman pro with stints at Orrell, Bedford and with England A. "Sale are under no obligation to pay him,'' Kennedy added. "But we will. We are standing by him to the hilt.''
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments