Bath trio found guilty of misconduct - but not drug-use!

Kalashnikov_Kid

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/my_club/bath/8093596.stm

Former Bath trio Michael Lipman, Alex Crockett and Andrew Higgins have been suspended for nine months after being found guilty of missing two drug tests.

The suspension was reduced from 15 months and backdated to 1 June.

The Rugby Football Union's disciplinary panel took into consideration their "good character and concerns about the advice they received".

Allegations that the three players had taken drugs were dropped at the start of the hearing.

Solicitor Richard Mallett, acting on behalf of Lipman, Crockett and Higgins, said: "All three players are absolutely devastated by today's result and that they have now been suspended from playing the game they love.

"We would like to emphasis that the charges against the players that they had actually taken cocaine were dismissed at the beginning of the proceedings.

"They are of course considering their position and feel that it would be wholly inappropriate to comment further at this stage."

England international Lipman, 29, and Crockett, 27, were co-captains of Bath last season but, along with the 27-year-old Higgins, remain without a club with the new Guinness Premiership season due to begin on 4 September.

The trio quit Bath on 1 June in protest at the claims and said the charges would be "vigorously contested".

They were due to face an internal hearing at Bath but left before it commenced, saying "scurrilous and unsubstantiated allegations" had forced their exit.

The panel, chaired by Judge Jeff Blackett, said it took "no pleasure in imposing its sanction as the players involved are decent young men".

In its summing up the panel added: "If the players had nothing to fear from taking a drugs test then they would have taken them.

"The reality of the case was that at the time when asked to take a drugs test, the players believed there was a risk of positive results.

"This was either because they knew they had ingested drugs or they had drunk so much alcohol that they could not remember whether or not they had ingested drugs.

"Each of the players therefore decided to play for time, keep out of contact and then hide behind legal defence."

The body that represents the 12 Premiership clubs, Premier Rugby, said in a statement that the result of Monday's hearing proves that Bath Rugby's disciplinary process "has been vindicated".

Premier Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty added: "The ruling has strengthened the Premiership clubs' determination to take appropriate action to protect the core values of our sport.

"We recognise that with the growing popularity of the Premiership comes increasing risks, particularly for the health and welfare of our players.

"Our priority is to implement the new education and discipline programmes for the 2009/10 season to further address these types of risk, with the Illicit Drugs Programme being the cornerstone."

Bath chief executive Bob Calleja said: "The club is satisfied that it acted correctly in requiring Michael Lipman, Alex Crockett and Andrew Higgins to attend an internal disciplinary hearing, at which their alleged refusal to take drugs tests was due to have been considered.

"The result demonstrates that the club has now been vindicated and that in the circumstances it was a reasonable request to ask the players for a drugs test."

Former Bath lock Justin Harrison has already been banned for eight months after he admitted taking illegal drugs.

The 35-year-old Australian, who retired at the end of last season, was found guilty of "actions prejudicial to the interests of the game" at a hearing on 16 July.

In February, Bath and England prop Matt Stevens was given a two-year ban after testing positive for cocaine.

England international Lipman, 29, and Crockett, 27, were co-captains of Bath last season but, along with the 27-year-old Higgins, remain without a club with the new Guinness Premiership season due to begin on 4 September.

The trio quit Bath on 1 June in protest at the claims and said the charges would be "vigorously contested".

They were due to face an internal hearing at Bath but left before it commenced, saying "scurrilous and unsubstantiated allegations" had forced their exit.

The panel, chaired by Judge Jeff Blackett, said it took "no pleasure in imposing its sanction as the players involved are decent young men".

In its summing up the panel added: "If the players had nothing to fear from taking a drugs test then they would have taken them.

"The reality of the case was that at the time when asked to take a drugs test, the players believed there was a risk of positive results.

"This was either because they knew they had ingested drugs or they had drunk so much alcohol that they could not remember whether or not they had ingested drugs.

"Each of the players therefore decided to play for time, keep out of contact and then hide behind legal defence."

The body that represents the 12 Premiership clubs, Premier Rugby, said in a statement that the result of Monday's hearing proves that Bath Rugby's disciplinary process "has been vindicated".

Premier Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty added: "The ruling has strengthened the Premiership clubs' determination to take appropriate action to protect the core values of our sport.

"We recognise that with the growing popularity of the Premiership comes increasing risks, particularly for the health and welfare of our players.

"Our priority is to implement the new education and discipline programmes for the 2009/10 season to further address these types of risk, with the Illicit Drugs Programme being the cornerstone."

Bath chief executive Bob Calleja said: "The club is satisfied that it acted correctly in requiring Michael Lipman, Alex Crockett and Andrew Higgins to attend an internal disciplinary hearing, at which their alleged refusal to take drugs tests was due to have been considered.

"The result demonstrates that the club has now been vindicated and that in the circumstances it was a reasonable request to ask the players for a drugs test."

Former Bath lock Justin Harrison has already been banned for eight months after he admitted taking illegal drugs.

The 35-year-old Australian, who retired at the end of last season, was found guilty of "actions prejudicial to the interests of the game" at a hearing on 16 July.

In February, Bath and England prop Matt Stevens was given a two-year ban after testing positive for cocaine.

England international Lipman, 29, and Crockett, 27, were co-captains of Bath last season but, along with the 27-year-old Higgins, remain without a club with the new Guinness Premiership season due to begin on 4 September.

The trio quit Bath on 1 June in protest at the claims and said the charges would be "vigorously contested".

They were due to face an internal hearing at Bath but left before it commenced, saying "scurrilous and unsubstantiated allegations" had forced their exit.

The panel, chaired by Judge Jeff Blackett, said it took "no pleasure in imposing its sanction as the players involved are decent young men".

In its summing up the panel added: "If the players had nothing to fear from taking a drugs test then they would have taken them.

"The reality of the case was that at the time when asked to take a drugs test, the players believed there was a risk of positive results.

"This was either because they knew they had ingested drugs or they had drunk so much alcohol that they could not remember whether or not they had ingested drugs.

"Each of the players therefore decided to play for time, keep out of contact and then hide behind legal defence."

The body that represents the 12 Premiership clubs, Premier Rugby, said in a statement that the result of Monday's hearing proves that Bath Rugby's disciplinary process "has been vindicated".

Premier Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty added: "The ruling has strengthened the Premiership clubs' determination to take appropriate action to protect the core values of our sport.

"We recognise that with the growing popularity of the Premiership comes increasing risks, particularly for the health and welfare of our players.

"Our priority is to implement the new education and discipline programmes for the 2009/10 season to further address these types of risk, with the Illicit Drugs Programme being the cornerstone."

Bath chief executive Bob Calleja said: "The club is satisfied that it acted correctly in requiring Michael Lipman, Alex Crockett and Andrew Higgins to attend an internal disciplinary hearing, at which their alleged refusal to take drugs tests was due to have been considered.

"The result demonstrates that the club has now been vindicated and that in the circumstances it was a reasonable request to ask the players for a drugs test."

Former Bath lock Justin Harrison has already been banned for eight months after he admitted taking illegal drugs.

The 35-year-old Australian, who retired at the end of last season, was found guilty of "actions prejudicial to the interests of the game" at a hearing on 16 July.

In February, Bath and England prop Matt Stevens was given a two-year ban after testing positive for cocaine.





I doubt Bath management would have gone as far as to make up drug-related allegations and undergo an internal investigation just for the sake of ousting a few players. Why leave before the enquiry? Vindication my @rse!

remus808

tl;dr - but saw it on Sky News this morning.

My question is how they recieved a much more leniant ban than Matt Stevens, even though the RFU stated words to the effect that "anyone who refuses to take a drug test will be punished to the same extent as those who test positive"

leeroybrown

It's Bath who feel that they've been vindicated not the players. Not that it will be much comfort to the club given that they've now lost five players to suspensions in the last year. I think that the players themselves should be very happy with the outcome and if they've any sense they'll choose not to appeal to avoid risking a far heaver punishment.

leeroybrown

karmabass wrote: »

My question is how they recieved a much more leniant ban than Matt Stevens, even though the RFU stated words to the effect that "anyone who refuses to take a drug test will be punished to the same extent as those who test positive"

They weren't official in-competition drug tests. The club had requested that the players take internal drug tests. I was expecting a harsher punishment but clearly the players legal teams did a good job.

remus808

leeroybrown wrote: »

They weren't official in-competition drug tests. The club had requested that the players take internal drug tests. I was expecting a harsher punishment but clearly the players legal teams did a good job.

Funnily enough, it seems to be the opposite. I just read that their bans were reduced from 2 years to 9 months because of the 'poor and incorrect legal advice' they recieved!

Kalashnikov_Kid

Is getting a substantial reduction to a rugby suspension on appeal, no matter what the offence or its severity, now nothing more than a formality?!