APPENDIX 9

GUIDANCE ISSUED BY THE RFU DISCIPLINARY OFFICER

These notes are to be used in conjunction with the Regulations.

RFU GUIDANCE Note 1

Recklessness

Reference:

A. RFU Disciplinary Regulation 2.2

When deciding the relevant sanction in relation to a particular offence, Disciplinary Panels are required to assess the seriousness of the player’s conduct.1  One of the key assessments is to decide whether the relevant offending was deliberate or reckless, noting if the offending was accidental then no sanction applies.  The term “reckless” is described in the following terms:

“the player knew (or should have known) there was a risk of committing an act of illegal and/or Foul play.”

The RFU’s disciplinary regime reflects iRB Regulation 17.  It exists to penalise players whose foul play or misconduct is other than purely accidental, and one of its most important principles is to prevent the risk of injury to other players in a dynamic and physical sport.  Players have an obligation to ensure that they do not cause injury to opponents, so there is a presumption that any conduct which is proscribed by iRB Law 10 merits a sanction.

The offences listed in iRB Law 10.42 do not include mens rea (the mental element of a crime or or offending behaviour) – they create offences of strict liability.  That is, by way of illustration, it is illegal to stamp on an opponent3 – rather than deliberately stamp, or recklessly stamp or accidentally stamp.  An offence is committed if the prohibited act occurs and the mental state of the offending player at the time the offence was committed is only relevant to the level of subsequent sanction.  It is therefore wrong in principle to import definitions of criminal recklessness from any single criminal jurisdiction, in considering whether or not the alleged offence was committed.

The definition of recklessness is derived from IRB Regulation 17.  It has worldwide application and is rugby specific.  It serves to penalise players whose conduct is other than purely accidental and is designed to prevent the risk of injury to other players.  Nevertheless, Chairmen of panels may find the following expanded guidance helpful in interpreting the meaning of the IRB definition of reckless.

“A player is acting recklessly if, before doing something he either fails to give any thought to the possibility that there is a risk that he might commit an act of foul play, or having recognised that there was such a risk, he nevertheless went on to do it.”

Thus, again by way of illustration, where a player intends to tackle an opponent by contact with his chest, but the opponent ducks just before contact is made so the contact is with the neck, an offence contrary to Law 10.4(e) will have been committed4.  In assessing the relevant entry point for sanction it would be appropriate to decide that this offending was reckless because there was a risk that the opponent would duck into the tackle, or that the tackler may misjudge the point of contact.  It could not be said in these circumstances that the contact with the head was accidental.

1Regulation 20.5.2
2Dangerous Play and Misconduct
3IRB Law 10.4.b
4Dangerous tackling – second paragraph: “A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders”.

RFU GUIDANCE Note 2

Offending of the least serious kind – 8.2.9.

Normally players will be entitled to no more than a maximum of 50% discount from the entry point.  However Disciplinary Panels can apply a greater reduction from the entry point suspension where it makes each of the following findings:

i. the Player’s conduct is to be categorised under Regulation 8.2.5 at the lower end of the scale of seriousness;
ii. there are no on-field or off-field aggravating features;
iii. there are compelling on-field and/or off-field mitigating factors; and

there are truly exceptional circumstances that make it necessary to apply a greater reduction than 50% from the entry point in order to avoid clear injustice/unfairness to the Player charged.”