Richards Banned for Three Years

Mr.Applepie

I'm quite drunk so I won't add more then I hope Quins get booted out of the Heineiken cup too!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/my_club/harlequins/8191371.stm

RtD

According to PR forum

Fine increased to 300,000 NOT SUSPENDED.
Richards banned for 3 years.
Brennan banned for 2 years.
Williams' ban reduced to 4 months.
Charge against doctor dropped on a technicality.

No HEC ban

mikedragon32

The end of the report in the link states that a decision has yet to be made on a HEC ban for the club.

They should be booted out. The whole episode was one of the most cynical abuses of rules that I've seen in any sport.

RtD

http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/12_12971.php

Appeal Decisions
After almost 14 hours of hearings the independent Appeal Committee, chaired by Rod McKenzie (Scotland) and also comprising Professor Lorne D Crerar (Scotland) and Mark McParland (Ireland), issued the following decisions.

Tom Williams: Following the introduction of new evidence by Mr Williams where he admitted his guilt in the Misconduct and where he explained the part played by Mr Richards and Mr Brennan in fabricating the wound or blood injury, as well as disclosing full details of the steps taken by those involved to cover up what had happened in the period following the match, the Committee upheld the appeal and reduced the sanction to a suspension of four (4) months up-to and including 19 November 2009.

Dean Richards: Following the introduction of the new evidence by Mr Williams and an admission of guilt by Dean Richards, the Committee allowed the ERC appeal and found that Mr Richards was guilty of Misconduct in that he organised the fabrication of a wound or blood injury. Mr Richards acknowledged that he had orchestrated the subsequent cover up of the incident.

The Committee imposed a suspension of three (3) years on Mr Richards from participating in any capacity in ERC tournaments and will be requesting that other tournaments and Governing Bodies give effect to this suspension in their tournaments.

Steph Brennan: Following the introduction of the new evidence by Mr Williams and an admission of guilt by Steph Brennan, the Committee allowed the appeal and found that Mr Brennan was guilty of Misconduct in that he participated in the fabrication of a wound or blood injury. Mr Brennan acknowledged that he had been actively involved in the subsequent cover up of the incident.

The Committee imposed a suspension of two (2) years on Mr Brennan from participating in any capacity in ERC tournaments and will be requesting that other tournaments and Governing Bodies give effect to this suspension in their tournaments.

During the course of the hearing it was disclosed that there had been four previous occasions in non ERC tournaments in which Mr Richards and Mr Brennan had fabricated a wound or blood injury. Details of these incidents will be passed on to the relevant tournaments organiser.

The Club (Harlequins): The Committee found that the club were vicariously liable for the actions of its employees and that the level of Misconduct by its employees was of a greater magnitude than had been established in the original hearing based on the new evidence from Mr Williams and upheld the ERC appeal and increased the fine imposed on the Club to 300,000 Euro, which it must pay in full by 1 December 2009.

Dr Wendy Chapman: The Appeal Committee dismissed the ERCs Disciplinary Officer’s appeal on grounds that the Appeal Committee lacked jurisdiction under the Disciplinary Rules in this particular case.

Notes
Independent Appeal Committee:
a) Following the decision(s) of an independent Disciplinary Committee all parties (the Club, player(s), individuals and ERC) have the right to appeal the decision(s) of the Committee.

b) The independent Appeal Committee is chosen by the Chairman of the independent Disciplinary Panel Professor Lorne Crerar.

c) None of the members of the independent Disciplinary Committee who issued the decisions being challenged in the appeal(s) may sit on the independent Appeal Committee.

d) The full written decision(s) for the original independent Disciplinary Hearing and the Appeal Hearing will be made available on ercrugby.com/disciplinenews at a later date when the full written decision(s) of the Appeal hearing have been completed and issued to all parties.

:eek:

anonymous_joe

A part of me when I heard this was a bit sympathetic.

Then I remembered it was Leinster they tried to fcuk over. So ha fcuking ha.

Anyways, they forgot the cardinal rule - it's only cheating if you're caught. That was too high profile a game, too high profile a moment, no-one was ever going to miss it.

Could really fcuk Quins up permanently, this'll cost them a fortune.

Trotter

Can someone remind me how the clown got whatever he got into his mouth? I have visions of him with a sachet of supermacs sauce down his sock or something.

Reflector

It was absolutely hilarious when he winked at the bench, I mean did he not think someone was going to cop it. Hope that he doesn't have to go to court for anything.
"How do you plead,"
"Not Guilty" *wink
What a F**kin idiot.

Gelio

Well done to the Erc on making this happen by giving tw the ban and forcing him to give names. The cheating was bad enough but letting tw take the fall was just awful. Everyone got what they deserved.

wexican

They've fabricated a wound or injury 4 other times too???

Wow, they deserve every minute of their bans.

davylee

They were saying on sky news that that there was 3 or 4 similar events involving richards
good ridence

Kalashnikov_Kid

Justice for once

sickpuppy

Dean Richards was also coach of Leicester during the infamous hand of Back incident when the ball was robbed from Stringers hands froma five yard scrum.

Neil Francis wrote an article about it on sunday Williams was following orders if he didnt comply hed be fooked at the club i think.

[Jackass]

Well done ERC, it's more often than not you see stuff like this go in in all sorts of sports and complete cop out punishment being handed out.

This punishment is extremely heavy handed, but at an appropriate level to show that this cheating will not be tollerated and i think the ban for coaches and medical staff have taken the brunt, putting careers on hold, damaging cheaters reputations permanently, the employers have taken a massive hit, making sure club policy will never tolerate this cheating and the player has got a hefty enough ban for partaking in it, but is no longer the fall guy.

This really is spot on and Williams himself said it best:

"I hope that, as a result of this episode, no player or employee will ever be put in such a compromised position, and if they are then they will always tell the truth, as I had wish I had done from the outset."

It should put a serious end to this carry on, because ERC have made it clear that they wont take any sh*t.

Final step should be expulsion from this seasons competition and then I think ERC have handled this absolutely superbly.

conf101

Great to see proper punishments being handed out to the people who were actually responsible!!

bamboozle

i hope Harlequins get booted out of ERC competitions for a few years also, even if they didnt know what was happening at the time, the club still stood behind Richards & Co when they should have had an internal investigation and discretely parted company with those involved.

Fair play to the ERC, this will stamp out this form of cheating in the game. Its only a pity similar length bans are not given for gouging.

finlma

Anyone know when the other 4 incidents were. Have they been named?

walshb

How did the blood man get that sentenced reduced from 12 to 4 months?
I don't see how anyone can be saying fair play to the ERC....

Seriously, the Rugby authorities are a sham and they cannot be taken
seriously with their lax sentences. It's not the first time these sentences have been reduced on a appeal and it won't be the last. Wait for it, in a few weeks, it will probably be further reduced.

nerophis

walshb wrote: »

How did the blood man get that sentenced reduced from 12 to 4 months?

Williams sang a sweet falsetto reminiscent of birds of the genus Serinus. ERC said thank you very much for exposing the more serious rot- those directing the cheating and accordingly reduced suspension. Any idiot who'd wink at the bench coming off was clearly not the mastermind of the cheating.

All things aside ERC et al certainly need to get clarification from the IRB on substitutions- the current rules are a mess and almost designed to allow loop-holes like this develop.

P_1

I think the 1 year ban was initially given due to Williams not helping with the initial investigation. The ERC actually came up with a genious idea in giving a harsh ban knowing that Williams would have to appeal and thus all the gory details would have to come out in the appeal.

drkpower

nerophis wrote: »

All things aside ERC et al certainly need to get clarification from the IRB on substitutions- the current rules are a mess and almost designed to allow loop-holes like this develop.

im not sure if the most accurate description for this was a "loophole"...:eek:

damnyanks

well for instance whats a there to stop a player injuring themselves intentiontally so that they may be replaced? Run into someones elbow in a ruck or something like that.

walshb

nerophis wrote: »

Williams sang a sweet falsetto reminiscent of birds of the genus Serinus. ERC said thank you very much for exposing the more serious rot- those directing the cheating and accordingly reduced suspension. Any idiot who'd wink at the bench coming off was clearly not the mastermind of the cheating.

All things aside ERC et al certainly need to get clarification from the IRB on substitutions- the current rules are a mess and almost designed to allow loop-holes like this develop.

Lets be clear here, Williams is a grown man, not some kid who had no choice.
This attitude that the player was simply following orders doesn't cut it and excuses
it in the wrong. He is part of the deception, a key player in it and the man who actually carried out the cheating, so this pissy' reduced sentence merely defends it and the this attitude condones it and as long as we have this attitude and lack of standards and shame, the sport will always be corrupt and rotten.
You want fair play and honesty, then start getting serious with rule implementation.

nerophis

walshb wrote: »

Lets be clear here, Williams is a grown man, not some kid who had no choice.
This attitude that the player was simply following orders doesn't cut it and excuses
it in the wrong. He is part of the deception, a key player in it and the man who actually carried out the cheating, so this pissy' reduced sentence merely defends it and the this attitude condones it and as long as we have this attitude and lack of standards and shame, the sport will always be corrupt and rotten.
You want fair play and honesty, then start getting serious with rule implementation.

I think the current rules where a tactically substituted player is allowed to return to the field allows these cheating incidents to occur. An injured player like Evans should never have returned to the field and did so at the behest of management. Williams didn't decide on his own to get the blood capsule- it was supplied to him. He HAD to take it or suffer the consequences. He now suffers the consequences and his playing career is definitely going to suffer maybe not as much as some would like but he had to given an incentive. He was given a reduction in sentence for co-operating and I'm fairly sure the ERC see this as fair given that they got the bigger fish- the one in my opinion more culpable for the cheating since they created and tolerated a culture where fake blood capsules were available for use and where it was seen as one of the ways to win at all costs. (I think this culture of exploiting weaknesses in the Laws would have seen Vickery feign an injury in the first Lions test to allow for uncontested scrums. To the managements credit they didn't take that route.) When money is on the table not everyone is going to take the high road- in sport as in life.

One option that might help would be that a doctor would have to certify an injured player and put their own professional integrity on the line in order to allow a subbed player return to the field. In the contrary a player returned to the field should be certified medically as well. I think in professional sport, not just rugby, it is very common for players who are unfit to return are encouraged to come back playing even in cases where concusion was involved.

The reason the IRB allow players to be subbed on for an injured player is that they would rather not see fourteen or thirteen man rugby or there is a perception that injuries would occur to players out of position eg front row. Every pundit moans at length when scrums go uncontested- maybe they shouldn't. Maybe the perception that front row is such a specialised position that direct substitution is the only option is wrong. Most forwards would have some experience even at lower levels of playing there. Maybe if the direct sub rule was taken out we'd see more opensides training for the posibility of going in at loose head, not much difference physically between most blindsides and tight head props these days either. I think if the balance says that can't happen then the team without a front row must concede all scrums, whether their fault or not to a free kick to the opposition. We might find that being a prop isn't such a specialised position after all.

I think most rugby supporters want to a see a fair game and that cheating in all forms should be punished swiftly and fairly. ERC made the all the right moves in this instance IMHO

Gelio

walshb wrote: »

Lets be clear here, Williams is a grown man, not some kid who had no choice.
This attitude that the player was simply following orders doesn't cut it and excuses
it in the wrong. He is part of the deception, a key player in it and the man who actually carried out the cheating, so this pissy' reduced sentence merely defends it and the this attitude condones it and as long as we have this attitude and lack of standards and shame, the sport will always be corrupt and rotten.
You want fair play and honesty, then start getting serious with rule implementation.

Please read the other thread. Williams had no choice. Say he refused to do it, they go on and lose the match, the management hate him, his team mates and friends hate him and I'm pretty sure he'll feel like he let everybody down.

walshb

Well, that seems to be the way now, player is exonerated because he had no choice:rolleyes:

You know, if that's the case, this ludicrous argument can be made for anything.
Hmm, "I gouged out the opponents eyes because I was told to.":rolleyes:

We could then apply this to every cheat in sport. Oh, I only took
the drugs because my manager told me to.

He cheated, was part of a wider circle who cheated, and he should have
NOT been let off. From 12 months to 4 months is a big let off

You know, grown adults are responsible for their actions and to me, he not only was
complicit, he seemed to be damn well enjoying it.

If this was POC or BOD, I would be the exact same. Grown men, players and adults have
to be responsible and accountable for their actions and not be allowed hide behind the lame
excuse, that, "I had no choice." This isn't play school.

But like I said, we will fall for any old sob story and will
not get tough, hence, we will have this continually occurring and ruining
the honesty and integrity of the game, or what is left of it

Riskymove

walshb wrote: »

But like I said, we will fall for any old sob story and will
not get tough, hence, we will have this continually occurring and ruining
the honesty and integrity of the game, or what is left of it

how far do we take such things though when it comes to "cheating" which is different to different people. there were incidents where games go to uncontested scrums where props have to go off "injured" and as coincedence would have it, they were losing every scrum

if you know something is against a spirit of honesty or integrity, should you refuse to take advantage?

if you are given a penalty you know to be wrong should you refuse it?

should you call penalties on yourself a la golf?

walshb

I am well aware of the levels of cheating a game can contain, from the "not so bad," to the horrendous, or blatant and deceiving. I would put this incident as close to the top as
possible. A complete mission by many to win a all costs...

davylee

bamboozle wrote: »

i hope Harlequins get booted out of ERC competitions for a few years also, even if they didnt know what was happening at the time, the club still stood behind Richards & Co when they should have had an internal investigation and discretely parted company with those involved.

Fair play to the ERC, this will stamp out this form of cheating in the game. Its only a pity similar length bans are not given for gouging.

I know gouging is scandolous in every form but surely even that is in a different league from what williams and harlequins have done.
Imo, a player who is on the field and in the heat of the moment should be forgiven far quicker than a club who plotted such a plan to win a match

walshb

Also, why is everyone so quick to try and exonerate Williams and make out that he was only following orders. How does anyone know that he himself was not ALL FOR IT, encouraging it and wanting it? Can a rugby player not be a cheat? It has to be the club who makes him do it and makes him a cheat?

For all we know, Williams could have been well up for it as well as doing it.

Folks seem to want to make out that he was doing it under duress and against his
will and better judgment, as if he is honest and genuine, but was just deliberately led astray. I don't buy it for a second! The guy is a cheat, out and out cheat!

razorblunt

The doc got off on a technicality, can't some sort of Medicine Association step in and object to his licence, I mean first of all the whole "blood" fiasco he was part of and also he didnt object to Evans going back on even though he could barely stand on the knee.

Player safety, what what what?

Repolho

sickpuppy wrote: »

Dean Richards was also coach of Leicester during the infamous hand of Back incident when the ball was robbed from Stringers hands froma five yard scrum.

I doubt this had anything to do with the coach. Just a piece of opportunism from Back I would say.

Gelio

Repolho wrote: »

I doubt this had anything to do with the coach. Just a piece of opportunism from Back I would say.

What? Thats crazy! Of course it was Richards. Who else would have organised it?
And as for Back, the only people that still care about that are Munster fans. Thats not a dig at munster fans BTW its a fact

bamboozle

ajeffares wrote: »

What? Thats crazy! Of course it was Richards. Who else would have organised it?
And as for Back, the only people that still care about that are Munster fans. Thats not a dig at munster fans BTW its a fact

the only folk who make an issue out of Neil Back still are those dont really understand rugby. Making an issue of what he did is on a par with giving out about scrum halves giving crooked feeds into scrums, or hands in rucks. Like it or not rugby has its 'dark arts' and those who get away with these are highly regarded as a result - Richie McCaw being the prime example. People often forget in rugby its very important to study the referee, if he's lax on penalising offside you make sure you're players test him on this, if he's lax on binding at scrum time you make sure you're backrow are aware etc

Riskymove

ajeffares wrote: »

What? Thats crazy! Of course it was Richards. Who else would have organised it?
And as for Back, the only people that still care about that are Munster fans. Thats not a dig at munster fans BTW its a fact

I agree and am a Munster fan...

but then again, who else would care as it was done against Munster?

the people most upset about the Quins debacle are Leinster fans....imagine if Quins had won?

Gelio

bamboozle wrote: »

the only folk who make an issue out of Neil Back still are those dont really understand rugby. Making an issue of what he did is on a par with giving out about scrum halves giving crooked feeds into scrums, or hands in rucks. Like it or not rugby has its 'dark arts' and those who get away with these are highly regarded as a result - Richie McCaw being the prime example. People often forget in rugby its very important to study the referee, if he's lax on penalising offside you make sure you're players test him on this, if he's lax on binding at scrum time you make sure you're backrow are aware etc

Hold on, let me clear this up before I get attacked. I don't mean all Munster fans but the few people who still complain about it are Munster fans

Repolho

Just to be clear on my earlier post.

I don't think Richards had anything to do with Neil Back's knocking the ball into the scrum incident, as I said just a piece of opportunism by Back.

I do think he orchestrated the whole fake blood incident, and as has been proved in the investigation that this is not the first time.

I think the punishments handed out to all the people involved were fair, but I think they should also have banned Quins for a year from the HEC.

Gelio

Repolho wrote: »

Just to be clear on my earlier post.

I don't think Richards had anything to do with Neil Back's knocking the ball into the scrum incident, as I said just a piece of opportunism by Back.

I do think he orchestrated the whole fake blood incident, and as has been proved in the investigation that this is not the first time.

I think the punishments handed out to all the people involved were fair, but I think they should also have banned Quins for a year from the HEC.

Ok thanks for that. I thought you were blaming richards for back.
A year out of HC would be punishing a lot of people who had nothing to do with the fake blood

pappyodaniel

Digifriendly

In that video notice what Stuart Barnes says - 'Who punched Tom Williams in the mouth - Tom Williams?' He obviously smelled a rat ! Sad to hear Dean Richards say his conscience was clear in light of recent events.

Crash

Richards has come out and said that he had no knowledge of Williams mouth being cut until 8 days later, and that Williams insisted it be cut in the changing room.

Digifriendly

Crash wrote: »

Richards has come out and said that he had no knowledge of Williams mouth being cut until 8 days later, and that Williams insisted it be cut in the changing room.

This whole episode is indicative of how twisted human nature really can be. I'm really disappointed in Dean Richards as up to this I regarded him as one of the best coaches in the business.

cooker3

Interview with Richards on BBC. He fully admits to it here, honest at last
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/8212831.stm

phog

Digifriendly wrote: »

This whole episode is indicative of how twisted human nature really can be. I'm really disappointed in Dean Richards as up to this I regarded him as one of the best coaches in the business.

+1

I was amazed that this was allowed happen and in hindsight if Leinster were beaten that day it would have cost them their first HEC Championship so there were big stakes involved and the ban is fully justified in my eyes, I did feel sorry for Williams after the initial ban as I thought he was just a pawn in all of this.

Sandwich

phog wrote: »

+1

I was amazed that this was allowed happen and in hindsight if Leinster were beaten that day it would have cost them their first HEC Championship so there were big stakes involved and the ban is fully justified in my eyes

I wonder how many times have Leinster done it themselves ?

anonymous_joe

Sandwich wrote: »

I wonder how many times have Leinster done it themselves ?

I'd be amazed if any team hasn't cheated in a game like this tbh.

CatFromHue

it was always rumored that the aussies used to do it alot when the rule first came in.
i dont think they used fake blood, just ran off and said they were bleeding haha.

pisslips

Honestly, a rugby career has a very short lifespan and to ban Williams for 12 months would basically end his career. I couldn't see a professional team hanging on to him for a 12 month suspension when he's not even a high profile player. So that would have been very harsh. He was in a ,"damned if you do, damned if you don't situation"......but I have to say, what an idiot for winking, on live television with hundreds of thousands or even millions watching.......what an idiot.

Richards will be back, probably.So he can't coach a team in the ERC, it's not the end of the world for him, he's a very high profile club coach.

If the physio/doctor? actually put the sachet in his mouth then he should be banned. If however, he wasn't told until after that it was fake blood thn obviously you can't blame him.

Someone suggested suspending or cancelling the doctors licence, which would be very very unfair. Perhaps you could suspend them from working with rugby teams, but to destroy their whole career over this is just crazy.

The whole point is to hand out tough but fair punishment, not to ruin people's lives. In fairness, Tom Williams has come out of this looking like an absolute idiot. Like he is going to have to put up with some amount of hassle for the rest of his career, how ever long that lasts.

And worse still, he'll probably still hear about it in 30 years, when he's trying to enjoy a pint, or retell a story about hir pro-rugby days.....He'll never live it down.

Crash

pisslips wrote: »

Richards will be back, probably.So he can't coach a team in the ERC, it's not the end of the world for him, he's a very high profile club coach.

the IRB have declared that bans like these must carry over to all member unions, so its 3 years during which he cannot register as a coach with any union. Don't think its QUITE as light as you seem to think

toomevara

ERC appeal judgement is in, quite indepth and I've just perused it...but the sense of it is that they're holding Dean Richards "centrally responsible" and increasing the fine from 250,000 to 300,000....No escape for Quins it appears, would also imagine that Mark Evans will have to resign at this point.

Full text here:

http://www.ercrugby.com/audio/AR-M700U_20090902_085314.pdf

ERC meeting in Dublin today to decide whether Quins be ejected from the tournament, although the solicitor representing the ERC disciplinary officer, Mr. Duthie, recommends on pg 86 that they be banned from the tournament...interesting, though reckon its all going to be dumped on Richards' head....

They need to let this go. No sense in permanently banning the club when it was a handful of people involved. Draw a line under it, build a bridge and get over it. The ERC has made their point.

twinytwo

Deleted User wrote: »

They need to let this go. No sense in permanently banning the club when it was a handful of people involved. Draw a line under it, build a bridge and get over it. The ERC has made their point.

let it go... take for example if they had beaten leinster because they had faked the bloob sub.. and had they not been caught it would have continued...As a coach he made a complete disgrace of himself and rugby...a 3 year ban is lucky.. how is this any different than a player taking drugs.. they cheat in order to gain an advantage... he should have gotten a life ban