Ospreys' Ricky Januarie under investigation by the ERC over HEC eligiblity.

thomond2006

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/my_club/ospreys/8533150.stm

The issue concerns scrum-half Ricky Januarie, who played in four Heineken Cup pool stage matches during a short-term spell with the Welsh region.
Januarie joined the Ospreys on a minimum three-month deal as required by European Rugby Cup [ERC] Ltd rules.

But the South African returned home after just over two months.


If the Ospreys are found guilty, they could at worst face expulsion from the tournament and be replaced in this season's quarter-final stages.

It would not be the first time the Ospreys have been hauled before the authorities.

Last month, they were fined 25,000 Euros after their 16-man fiasco in the Heineken Cup win over Leicester Tigers.

The Tigers complained over Lee Byrne's 50-second appearance as the Ospreys' extra man in their 17-12 Pool Three win.

The Ospreys' win sent them into the last eight and knocked Leicester out in the process.

The Welsh region are due to face Biarritz in the quarter-finals on 10 April.

Januarie joined the Ospreys on a short-term loan deal at the end of November after an injury crisis left the Welsh region short of experienced scrum-halves.

They announced he was joining on a three-month contract, the minimum length of time allowed for additional players under ERC rules.

But having helped the Ospreys reach the last eight the Springboks star then returned home to resume his career with the Stormers on 1 February - meaning he was only in Wales for little more than two months, rather than three.

It is understood that ERC are investigating after a complaint was made by Premier Rugby Limited, the body that represents English clubs.

A number of other players at other clubs are also being looked at over alleged breaches, understood to be in the Amlin Challenge Cup.
If the Ospreys are found guilty and they are removed from the quarter-finals, then Leicester are likely to be the club that would replace them.

The Tigers would become the next best pool runners-up, ahead of the Cardiff Blues on tries scored.

The Ospreys have been contacted but have yet to comment on the matter.

Oh dear.

Webbs

God Leicester are desperate to get the Ospreys thrown out arent they. It will leave a sour taste in the mouth if they get in on such technicalities.
imagine the fallout and repercussions for everyone involved in the HC if they (Leicester) went on to win it.

Otacon

I seriously doubt they'll get expelled from the HCup. I mean Harlequins actually cheated and they weren't expelled.

thomond2006

Fielding an ineligible player is a serious offence though.

Didn't Bristol get docked points in the GP for doing it a few seasons ago?

castie

He wasnt ineligible though.
He was signed and registered.
The fact is they may have lied about duration or released him early.

andrewdcs

Seems to me (obviously IANAL, wheh wheh wheh) that they still paid him for 3 months, is that not the letter of the law?
Would be a very strange technicality if he had to actually train with them / hang around for the 3 months, especially as 1 of them was during the 6 nations.

andrewdcs

andrewdcs wrote: »

Seems to me (obviously IANAL, wheh wheh wheh) that they still paid him for 3 months, is that not the letter of the law?
Would be a very strange technicality if he had to actually train with them / hang around for the 3 months, especially as 1 of them was during the 6 nations.

Eaxactly,once he was paid for 3 months hes fine.

Has he started playing again in SA though?
Then maybe they will get in trouble.

castie

Didnt he play a game on the 12th/13th for the stormers though?
Or there may even have been warmup games that he participated in.

Or to add to this the Stormers may have registered him as soon as he returned

castie

castie wrote: »

Didnt he play a game on the 12th/13th for the stormers though?
Or there may even have been warmup games that he participated in.

Or to add to this the Stormers may have registered him as soon as he returned

I have a feeling that the ERC cant do anything if he played in SA.

I think he is probably still on the books and is being paid up until the end of the 3 months period and even if he plays in SA the ERC cant do anything,they are a private organisation.

shanagarry

He played in the Stormers warm up game in the new stadium on 6th February, that was his first game back in SA.

I can see this one coming down to technicalities - they will probably argue that he was still contracted by them even though he was back in SA. Maybe there isn't anything that precludes someone from having two contracts with teams involved in different competitions? Especially as he was essentially just on loan to the Ospreys?

How long was Wian du Preez at Munster? I hope there is no problem with him.

castie

He signed the start of November making him free to leave the start of Febuary

PhatPiggins

Is Willie O Dea in charge of player management at the Ospreys?

You had16 players on the pitch.
Did we,I dont think so.
Its on tape.
Oh I forgot.
But Leicester had 16 too why am I getting punished.

I know the Ospreys are a new team but they really are a bunch of big names managed by well meaning incompetents. I'll be interested to see how this one pans out.

thomond2006

From rugby365:

If expulsion is the decision, it would throw this season's Heineken Cup quarter-finals into chaos, with Leicester taking the eighth-seed spot and Northampton, currently England's sole quarter-final representatives, moving up to seventh.

Two ties would need to be rescheduled, with Leicester going to Munster instead of Northampton, who would tackle Biarritz rather than the Ospreys.

Jebus, its not in Munsters interests to have the hairsprays kicked out and having to face the only side to have beaten them at home.

buck65

Leiscester or Northampton would be an equally tough game for us.
Doubt the Ospreys would be booted out though.

anonymous_joe

It's fairly shítty of Leicester. If they get the Hairsprays kicked out it'd be a travesty of justice. Rugby's not real life, the spirit of the law is actually fairly important.

Risteard

I'm fairly worried now. I hope du Preez was around for 3 months. Not sure though. It says on the Munster website he was on a 3 month contract.

castie

Contract was signed 6th november.
3 months ended 6th february.

Riskymove

castie wrote: »

Contract was signed 6th november.
3 months ended 6th february.

yeah that seems to be the way around it

he signed 6th November but did not actually become available to play for Munster until after AIs

he also left at end of january but contract obviously continued until 6 Feb

Stev_o

anonymous_joe wrote: »

It's fairly shítty of Leicester. If they get the Hairsprays kicked out it'd be a travesty of justice. Rugby's not real life, the spirit of the law is actually fairly important.

Leicester haven't lodged the complaint though...

thomond2006

Stev_o wrote: »

Leicester haven't lodged the complaint though...

Premier Rugby lodged the complaint, it makes sense to me it's logical to think that Leicester had a hand in this. I don't blame Leicester for going down this route.

I guarantee that if a non-GP side profited from Ospreys' expulsion, then the complaint would not have been made by Premier Rugby. Why would they bother?

PhatPiggins

Stev_o wrote: »

Leicester haven't lodged the complaint though...

Wont matter the ERC are more concerned with collecting revenue from hefty fines then up keeping the spirit of the game.

EmacB

PhatPiggins wrote: »

Wont matter the ERC are more concerned with collecting revenue from hefty fines then up keeping the spirit of the game.

what do you base this on?

2040

I doubt Cockerill is happy about this.

Stev_o

thomond2006 wrote: »

Premier Rugby lodged the complaint, it makes sense to me it's logical to think that Leicester had a hand in this. I don't blame Leicester for going down this route.

I guarantee that if a non-GP side profited from Ospreys' expulsion, then the complaint would not have been made by Premier Rugby. Why would they bother?

Wheeler could of suggested it to the PL but it's not Leicester lodging the complaint which some people think. From PL side of things they want as many English sides in the knock outs to make sure that English clubs are getting good attention from European media which can obviously lead to sponsorships bigger crowds etc. It makes sense from their point of view of things.

thomond2006

ERC ask Munster for paperwork on Du Preez deal
By Hugh Farrelly

Thursday February 25 2010

MUNSTER last night confirmed that the ERC have requested paperwork on Wian du Preez's registration on the same day it was revealed that the Ospreys are facing possible expulsion from the Heineken Cup over the eligibility of Ricky Januarie.

The South African scrum-half joined the Welsh club on a minimum three-month contract as required under European Rugby Cup Ltd rules but returned to South Africa to play for the Stormers after just over two months.

However, Munster are confident they have no case to answer in relation to Du Preez's eligibility.

The Irish province signed the South African prop on a short-term deal because regular loose-head prop Marcus Horan was unavailable due to illness and the Springbok played in four Heineken Cup pool matches and two Magners League games between December 5 and January 22 before returning to play with the Cheetahs.

The ERC would not confirm whether Munster were being investigated over the Du Preez signing last night, saying only that: "At this stage, it is not appropriate to comment on any investigation that may or may not be taking place."

However, Munster said there had been a request for the relevant paperwork relating to Du Preez's signing and said they "were extremely confident" there would be no issue arising out of it.

Du Preez impressed during his short time with the province and has been starting regularly for the Cheetahs since his return to South Africa. Horan has since recovered fully and performed strongly in recent outings for the Ireland Wolfhounds and in Munster's win over Edinburgh last Friday.

- Hugh Farrelly
Irish Independent

Podge_irl

Interesting.

I did think it odd at the time that there was a three month minimum signing period and Du Preez didn't seem to be here that long. I wasn't really sure how long he'd been here though so I assumed all was good. Surely if anything was going to come of this it would have been announced along with the Ospreys inquiry though?

Riskymove

Podge_irl wrote: »

Interesting.

I did think it odd at the time that there was a three month minimum signing period and Du Preez didn't seem to be here that long. I wasn't really sure how long he'd been here though so I assumed all was good. Surely if anything was going to come of this it would have been announced along with the Ospreys inquiry though?

as above the basic idea is that he was paid for three months, starting from end Oct or beginning Nov but he was unavailable for the first 3 or 4 weeks as he was with the SA squad

thus his 3 month contract ended at end Jan/start of Feb

I'd imagine they are looking at all recent 3 month contracts if they are to investigate Januarie

anonymous_joe

Stev_o wrote: »

Leicester haven't lodged the complaint though...

I'd be of the same opinion as Thomond. I assumed it was Premier Rugby at Leicester's bidding. If I'm wrong, I'd happily apologise to all resident Leicester fans. (That's just you right?)

thomond2006 wrote: »

Premier Rugby lodged the complaint, it makes sense to me it's logical to think that Leicester had a hand in this. I don't blame Leicester for going down this route.

I guarantee that if a non-GP side profited from Ospreys' expulsion, then the complaint would not have been made by Premier Rugby. Why would they bother?

So I'd assume.

As an aside, I'm bloody delighted we didn't get Giteau for our ML games at Christmas, given how this has ended up.

PhatPiggins

EmacB wrote: »

what do you base this on?

Their handling of the Quins bloodgate affair. Came done to a straight choice between tossing Quins out of this years comp or imposing a lucrative fine.

Riskymove

in any event I cannot see ospreys being thrown out...Januarie was an eligible player at the time of the pool games..there was no undue advantage or attempt to cheat

if for some reason the contract endeed earlier than it should, I cannot see it being anything other than an administrative error and a fine!!

if blatantly cheating or having 16 men on the pitch doesn't get you kicked out I doubt this will

conf101

Riskymove wrote: »

in any event I cannot see ospreys being thrown out...Januarie was an eligible player at the time of the pool games..there was no undue advantage or attempt to cheat

Well the whole point of the investigation is that he may not have actually been eligible at the time, hence the investigation.

I do agree though that I doubt they'll be thrown out!

PhatPiggins

Riskymove wrote: »

in any event I cannot see ospreys being thrown out...Januarie was an eligible player at the time of the pool games..there was no undue advantage or attempt to cheat

if for some reason the contract endeed earlier than it should, I cannot see it being anything other than an administrative error and a fine!!

if blatantly cheating or having 16 men on the pitch doesn't get you kicked out I doubt this will

Seeing as Munster would play Leicester instead of Northampton I'd prefer that the Ospreys stay in the comp.

Riskymove

conf101 wrote: »

Well the whole point of the investigation is that he may not have actually been eligible at the time, hence the investigation.

I do agree though that I doubt they'll be thrown out!

I know what you are saying.....its not that simple surely.....he WAS eligible at the time...certainly he was not ineligible..he had a "three month contract" at the time

I think its highly unlikely you can decide someone was retrospectively ineligible to play because that contract was terminated early, there can be a number of valid reasons for ending a contract early....its not like they only gave him a two month contract or whatever

...its more likely they will decide (if there is a case) that the ospreys did not abide by the terms of the ERC and be punished for an administrative error

Riskymove

PhatPiggins wrote: »

Seeing as Munster would play Leicester instead of Northampton I'd prefer that the Ospreys stay in the comp.

well thats a seperate issue...if a club deserves to be thrown out they should be...regardless of such consequences (and I say that as a Munster fan)....

conf101

Riskymove wrote: »

I know what you are saying.....its not that simple surely.....he WAS eligible at the time...certainly he was not ineligible..he had a "three month contract" at the time

I think its highly unlikely you can decide someone was retrospectively ineligible to play because that contract was terminated early, there can be a number of valid reasons for ending a contract early....its not like they only gave him a two month contract or whatever

...its more likely they will decide (if there is a case) that the ospreys did not abide by the terms of the ERC and be punished for an administrative error

I'd imagine you're right and that's what the investigation will find but I guess you never really know. Maybe the Ospreys found a loophole and exploited it.

Riskymove

conf101 wrote: »

I'd imagine you're right and that's what the investigation will find but I guess you never really know. Maybe the Ospreys found a loophole and exploited it.

in a hypothetical situation...say januarie told the ospreys to stick their contract and went back to SH before the 3 month period was up, could the ospreys be held accountable for playing him before that happened?

the ERC rules say a player has to have at least a 3-month contract to be eligible to play in the heineken cup.....when he played he did have a 3 month contract...he met the eligibility terms

dreamer_ire

Riskymove wrote: »

in a hypothetical situation...say januarie told the ospreys to stick their contract and went back to SH before the 3 month period was up, could the ospreys be held accountable for playing him before that happened?

the ERC rules say a player has to have at least a 3-month contract to be eligible to play in the heineken cup.....when he played he did have a 3 month contract...he met the eligibility terms

Or what it he was sacked as a result of gross misconduct etc

Riskymove

read today that the case is closed

Ospreys "have no case to answer"