A detailed review of disciplinary proceedings at Japan 2019 Rugby World Cup 2019 (Part 1)
World Rugby, the global governing body of rugby union, broke new ground last year when they held their premier tournament, the Rugby World Cup, in Japan. This was the first time since the event was launched back in 1987 that it was held outside of one of the ‘traditional’ rugby-playing nations. The evolution of the sport has been sizeable, having grown from a purely amateur sport into a fully professional and highly commercialised one in just over 30 years. This evolution has meant the game’s disciplinary processes have had to keep pace, with World Rugby leading the way.
In January 2016, as a check on the legal robustness of World Rugby’s approach to disciplinary matters, one of the authors of this article produced a critical evaluation of the disciplinary cases that were decided at the previous edition of the tournament, held in England in 2015 (see here and here). This evaluation included making a number of recommendations for the 2019 tournament. It was therefore a logical step to perform the same analysis at the conclusion of Rugby World Cup 2019 (RWC 2019). This was made even more important given the introduction by World Rugby of the ‘Decision-Making Framework for High Tackles’ only a few months before the start of the tournament, which was to be applied by match officials, citing commissioners, judicial officers and legal counsel alike.
Given the volume and complexity of the decisions that came out of RWC 2019, the analysis has been split into two parts, as follows:
Part 1 (below) examines:
Overview of the disciplinary process for RWC 2019;
- A substantive interpretation of the Laws and Regulations
a. Application of the decision-making framework for high tackles
i. Is the incident a high tackle or a shoulder charge?
ii. If so, was there contact with the head or neck of the ball-carrier?
iii. What was the degree of danger – high or low?
iv. Are there clear and obvious mitigating factors?
b. Intention vs recklessness
i. Is intention ever relevant to determining Foul Play?
ii.Proof of intentional offending
iii.The standard of recklessness
Part 2, available here, focuses on the sanctioning of proven acts of Foul Play and procedural issues, as well as the authors providing their overall conclusions.
Continue reading this article...
Already a member? Sign in
Get access to all of the expert analysis and commentary at LawInSport including articles, webinars, conference videos and podcast transcripts. Find out more here.
- Tags: Australia | Disciplinary | Dispute Resolution | England | International Rugby Board (IRB) | Japan | Laws of the Game of Rugby Union | New Zealand | Rugby | Rugby World Cup 2019 | South Africa | World Rugby Handbook | World Rugby Regulations
- A review of the disciplinary process and sanctioning decisions from Rugby World Cup 2015 - Part 1: Citing, hearings and video evidence
Kevin is a advisor and member of the editorial board for LawInSport, having previously acted as editor. In his day-to-day work he has two roles: as the Principal for his own consultancy business Captivate Legal & Sports Solutions, and Special Counsel for Sports Integrity at leading global sports technology and data company Genius Sports.
Ben Cisneros is a trainee solicitor at Morgan Sports Law, having graduated from Selwyn College, Cambridge, with a First in Law in 2019. He works across a variety of sports and practice areas but has particular expertise in Rugby Union. Ben writes a blog called 'Rugby and the Law' (www.rugbyandthelaw.com), covering a wide range of sports legal matters including discipline, concussion, anti-doping and governance, as well as all manner of commercial and regulatory issues. He has also had work published in the International Sports Law Journal, and is a fluent Spanish speaker.