Welsh amateur player jailed for match violence

Erin Go Brath

"A RUGBY player was jailed for 15 months yesterday for stamping on the head of an opponent during a match.

Rhys Garfield, 22, of Pontycymmer, near Bridgend, caused a 10cm wound which resulted in 21-year-old Gareth Howells needing 30 stitches in his head when playing for his village at Glynneath on December 10, 2005.

Officials last night warned players who seriously transgressed rugby’s laws could face sanctions both inside and outside the game.

Swansea Crown Court had earlier heard that Mr Howells was playing second row for Glynneath while Garfield was Pontycymmer’s number eight.

Garfield was seen to deliberately stamp on Mr Howells’s head in a ruck which formed after a lineout went to ground."

http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/wales-news/2007/11/13/rugby-player-jailed-for-match-violence-91466-20098886/


Seems kind of harsh to get 15 months jail for this. There has been some sentences handed down for similiar incidents before afaik, don't think such a big sentence has ever been handed down though. Interested to hear what people think about this?

Paulw

Intentionally stamping on someone's head is very serious. It has no place in rugby, and is most certainly criminal.

A few stud marks on the body are somewhat expected in a game of rugby, but someone stamping on your head certainly isn't.

daveharnett

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

"
Seems kind of harsh to get 15 months jail for this.

I dunno. Would you feel it was harsh if it happened outside a nightclub?
I know the law tends keeps out of sports, for obvious reasons. However behaviour like this is so far outside the rules, he can't expect any leniancy just because it was on a rugby pitch.

Erin Go Brath

daveharnett wrote: »

I dunno. Would you feel it was harsh if it happened outside a nightclub?
I know the law tends keeps out of sports, for obvious reasons. However behaviour like this is so far outside the rules, he can't expect any leniancy just because it was on a rugby pitch.

If it happened outside a nightclub, I suspect there would be a sentence handed down which would be equal to this, or possibly greater. Someone outside a nightclub couldn't claim to be clearing out a ruck as an excuse.


On a serious note, this guy is being made an example of imo. I do concur that stamping on someones head should have no place in the game. However, theres never been more than a 1 year sentence handed down to anyone for an on-field transgression before afaik. I agree with a jail sentence for this, and i'm completely against on-field thuggery, but 15 months is harsh.

I wonder if this happened to a professional rugby player in the World Cup for example, would the offender get 15 months? I seriously doubt it!

Paulw

So what if he's being made an example of? He deserves it. Someone has to be that example, and he was foolish enough to stamp on someone's head and get caught.

Fair play to the judge.

toomevara

No debate, guy's a moron, got what he deserved, no place for it on a rugby pitch. End of.

daveharnett

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Someone outside a nightclub couldn't claim to be clearing out a ruck as an excuse.

And neither can he. I have no problem with somebody using the boot to encourage somebody out of the way. I can also understand accidental contact with somebody's head where a player can't see where he's putting his foot.

However:

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

"a 10cm wound which resulted in 21-year-old Gareth Howells needing 30 stitches in his head"

The only explaination i can imagine causing this is that he deliberately raked his boot across this misfortune's head with a fair amount of force. For me, that is assault causing GBH and bears no relation to the rugby match that happened to be going on at the time.

Actually, I'm starting to feel that it's worse than the nightclub scenario, if anything.
1: The offender was (presumabley) sober.
2: The offerder was wearing STUDS.

toomevara

daveharnett wrote: »

For me, that is assault causing GBH and bears no relation to the rugby match that happened to be going on at the time.

Agree 100% absolutely spot on...the fact is that there is a small rump of psychotic f**kwits who play rugby, particularly in the lower echelons, simply for the opportunity to inflict violence on people. All of us who play rugby will have encountered them on the field. They have no love for, understanding of, or interest in the game. When such mongs are detected the full rigour of the law should be brought to bear on them.

Stev_o

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

I wonder if this happened to a professional rugby player in the World Cup for example, would the offender get 15 months? I seriously doubt it!

Well the nearest incident i can think of is the Portugal vs Romania match. A Romanian player started kicking a Portuguese player at the bottom of a ruck aiming for his head. Ill try hunt down the video but i can remember the Setanta team pointing it out and saying why wasnt he tried for attempted murder etc

Erin Go Brath

Stev_o wrote: »

Well the nearest incident i can think of is the Portugal vs Romania match. A Romanian player started kicking a Portuguese player at the bottom of a ruck aiming for his head. Ill try hunt down the video but i can remember the Setanta team pointing it out and saying why wasnt he tried for attempted murder etc

Exactly, this is the kind of thing i'm talking about! I think if there is custodial sentences being handed down for infringements within the game that they should equally apply to the higher echolons of the games as the lower. To distinguish between the two levels is wrong. I believe if an identical infringement happened in the professional game there wouldn't be anything done in regard to awarding jail sentencing. Thats why I believe the sentence is unfair.

daveharnett

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

To distinguish between the two levels is wrong. I believe if an identical infringement happened in the professional game there wouldn't be anything done in regard to awarding jail sentencing. Thats why I believe the sentence is unfair.

A very good point. The converse to this argument is that an identical infringement in the professional game should attract an identical charge and sentance. That other people have gotten away with it does not excuse this particular individual in my opinion.

Does the injured player need to press charges for an incident like this to be brought to court? If so, i'd suspect that pro players may feel under pressure not to do so.

Eoin

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Exactly, this is the kind of thing i'm talking about! I think if there is custodial sentences being handed down for infringements within the game that they should equally apply to the higher echolons of the games as the lower. To distinguish between the two levels is wrong. I believe if an identical infringement happened in the professional game there wouldn't be anything done in regard to awarding jail sentencing. Thats why I believe the sentence is unfair.

I've not much knowledge of the law, but is it not up to the victim to press charges? If so, then maybe that's what happened in the case you linked to, and didn't happen in the professional game mentioned. Edit - just noticed dave's post saying the same thing.

I'm undecided about this - in this instance, it might seem fair enough, but what happens if there's a bit of handbags in a game and someone presses charges for assault?

TheJoker

I remember seeing something similar to this on the news years ago. I think the fella was an Irish player.

Can anybody remember this?

Stev_o

eoin_s wrote: »

I'm undecided about this - in this instance, it might seem fair enough, but what happens if there's a bit of handbags in a game and someone presses charges for assault?

Jesus if that happened then i think 80% of all rugby players would be in jail or owe a hell of alot of money. I mean thats part of the game and given the physicality of it you kind of expect it to happen now and again. Its when it goes over the top that then it should be really dealt in more serious matter.

Just the thing that bothers me is that the defender COULD have not been intentionally trying harm the guy [as in assault] Now granted its on the head and you have to draw the line somewhere but still this is sport that is extremely physical and there are several reasons why this could have happened unintentionally but we will never know since there is no footage and even that cant prove a lot

Eoin

Stev_o wrote: »

Jesus if that happened then i think 80% of all rugby players would be in jail or owe a hell of alot of money. I mean thats part of the game and given the physicality of it you kind of expect it to happen now and again. Its when it goes over the top that then it should be really dealt in more serious matter.

Exactly - how does one define what's over the top? Presumably foul play (i.e. violence) is not within the confines of the game, and can therefore be treated as a criminal matter.

My, and daveharnett's question still stands - who initiated this? Could this charge have been progressed without the victim's consent, or did he willingly press charges? If so, then this could be more a case of him being a little precious about it, rather than the judge. Having not seen any pictures or footage, it's hard to gauge how bad or deliberate it was - I'm not sure it would take a huge amount of force or raking to give a 10cm cut on the head.

UrbanFox

eoin_s wrote: »

Exactly - how does one define what's over the top? Presumably foul play (i.e. violence) is not within the confines of the game, and can therefore be treated as a criminal matter.

My, and daveharnett's question still stands - who initiated this? Could this charge have been progressed without the victim's consent, or did he willingly press charges? If so, then this could be more a case of him being a little precious about it, rather than the judge. Having not seen any pictures or footage, it's hard to gauge how bad or deliberate it was - I'm not sure it would take a huge amount of force or raking to give a 10cm cut on the head.

Technically, the victim is just a witness for the prosecution in the case against the offender. The police probably got a statement of complaint from the victim. They don't need the victim' permission to proceed against the offender as it is not the victim's personal action against the culprit. The victim can take a civil action if he wishes against the offender.

I see your point about preciousness. I think that any element of that would have been challenged or exposed under cross examination.

Either way there is just no way that this sort of thing can be tolerated. Curiously enough this sort of thuggery is more likely to be found at the "lower echelons" of the game where skill is little bit short.

I don't what others think but I have seen a few "aggro" merchants this season playing in schools friendlies but they have been relatively few !!!

zAbbo

An interesting precedent has been set

Former England international Phil Greening has been told to pay nearly £29,000 in damages following an on-field incident from five years ago.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/english/7099629.stm

I remember seeing the video, and it looked a standard handoff, no malicious intent....

Eoin

zabbo wrote: »

An interesting precedent has been set


http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/english/7099629.stm

I remember seeing the video, and it looked a standard handoff, no malicious intent....

That's a worrying precedent indeed, especially if he never had a case to answer with the IRB.

What will happen if someone breaks a leg during a legitimate tackle etc?

mikedragon32

I don't think it's worrying at all. Just because the IRB and/or Union doesn't take action doesn't make a blatant act of thuggery right. Of course if it's a legitimate tackle then there is no case to answer. I doubt anyone if playing rugby nowadays doesn't expect to pick up a few injuries along the way in the course of play.

As UrbanFox said, there can be some terrible incidents at lower levels and just because they happened on a rugby pitch doesn't mean they're beyond the law.

Eoin

mikedragon32 wrote: »

I don't think it's worrying at all. Just because the IRB and/or Union doesn't take action doesn't make a blatant act of thuggery right. Of course if it's a legitimate tackle then there is no case to answer. I doubt anyone if playing rugby nowadays doesn't expect to pick up a few injuries along the way in the course of play.

As UrbanFox said, there can be some terrible incidents at lower levels and just because they happened on a rugby pitch doesn't mean they're beyond the law.

I don't know the incident in question (Greening's one) - was it a blatant act of thuggery? Was he penalised or cited for it? If not, then I do find it worrying that something that was judged to be within the rules of the game (or least not explicitly ruled to be illegal) can be sued over.

daveharnett

eoin_s wrote: »

I don't know the incident in question (Greening's one) - was it a blatant act of thuggery? Was he penalised or cited for it? If not, then I do find it worrying that something that was judged to be within the rules of the game (or least not explicitly ruled to be illegal) can be sued over.

I assume there is SOME legal mechanism to allow for full contact sports (otherwise, boxing surely couldn't exist)? Can any legally minded readers point to it?

Eoin

daveharnett wrote: »

I assume there is SOME legal mechanism to allow for full contact sports (otherwise, boxing surely couldn't exist)? Can any legally minded readers point to it?

Presumably anything outside the laws of the game is fair game in court?

zAbbo

Well a handoff is part and parcel of rugby, but you wouldn't accept it at 3am outside a niteclub.

I still can't find the video, but I remember the incident, and obviously it wasn't malicious which is why I think it's a serious precedent for the game.