Rugby World Cup 2003
Hearing before a Judicial Officer at Level 23, The Chifley Tower, 2 Chifley Square, Sydney Australia, in relation to the citing of Serge Betsen
Judicial Officer
Mr Brian McLoughlin, Solicitor
In attendance for Rugby World Cup Limited:
Mr Darren Bailey - Designated Disciplinary Official
Mr Hugh FitzSimons – Rugby World Cup
Representing the French Rugby Federation:
Mr Jo Maso – Team Manager
Mr Serge Betsen – Player
Citing Commissioner:
Mr Douglas Hunter
Interpreter
Mr Gilles Fabre
Date of hearing: 19th November 2003
This hearing has been convened under the Rugby World Cup 2003 Tournament Disciplinary Programme to consider the citing of Serge Betsen arising from an incident which occurred at the match between France (F) and England (E) on 16 November 2003 at Telstra Stadium, Sydney.
Mr Betsen was cited by the Citing Commissioner, Mr Hunter as a result of an incident that occurred in the 40th minute of the first half for an offence contrary to Law 10.4(c) of the Laws of the Game which provide that a player must not kick an opponent.
The incident was not seen by the referee or either of the touch judges for the game.
The incident
The Citing Commissioner in his report of 17th November 2003, describes the incident as follows:
"Following a line out won by E in their own half the forwards take the ball forward into the F half approximately 20 metres from touch on the near side and 9 metres into the F half. E9 picks the ball up and takes it forward. F6 then tackles E9. Both players are on the ground. F6 delays presentation of the ball by E9 and is penalised by the referee. F6 at that time pushes E9 in the back with his left foot as E9 presents the ball to his side using the "squeeze ball" technique. F6 then immediately follows through with his right foot to the top of the head of E9 in a raking motion. E9 reacts immediately by holding his head realising his head had been cut and he gets to his feet and calls for attention from the E medical team. A towel is applied to stem the bleeding and E9 is removed from the pitch. Following the penalty kick, the referee blows for half time. E9 resumes following the half time break. Video evidence in support of this statement is available".
Mr Betsen pleaded not guilty to the offence.
The evidence
Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 7.9 of the Tournament Disciplinary Programme, the Citing Commissioner, Mr Hunter, was requested by me to be in attendance for the purpose of explaining the basis of the Citing Complaint and to provide further assistance if requested.
Mr Hunter outlined the Complaint and subsequently elaborated on this when the video of the incident was viewed. I had not seen the video prior to the hearing and I thought it was necessary for me to request a number of reruns.
Video evidence
The video was divided into 4 segments namely:
1. pictures as broadcast on television;
2. a number of other angles;
3. the same angles at 50% of the speed; and
4. the same angles at 25% of the speed with the highlighting facilitator.
Documentary evidence
In addition, the following documentary evidence was submitted in support of the citing charge, namely:
5. Medical report of Dr Sharron Flahive dated 18 November 2003 in the course of which she states that Matt Dawson, the injured player, suffered "a 2cm superficial laceration which required suturing. The player was then cleaned and two 4/0 prolene sutures were inserted."
6. Match referee, Paddy O'Brien's report.
7. Touch Judge Stuart Dickonson's report.
8. Statement by Darren Bailey dated 18 November 2003 setting out a communication that passed between the referee manager, Steve Griffiths and touch judge Nigel Williams.
This concluded the evidence in support of the Citing Complaint and I deemed that Mr Betsen had a case to answer.
A case to answer
Mr Betsen at the outset of his evidence apologised for his actions stating that it was an accident and that it was unfortunate that somebody got injured but there was no intention on his part to harm or injure anyone. He then explained the incident which was to the effect that he had just tackled Mr Dawson and then endeavoured to get up again to try to recover the ball and as he got up he was cleaned out by two other members of the English team as a consequence of which his right ankle and knee became "stuck" as did his head.
The video is again then viewed and Mr Betsen elaborates on his evidence during the course of the running of the video by stating that his right leg is stuck as a result of being cleaned out by the two England players and with his free leg, namely his left one, by reflex action he tries to push himself away to get up quickly because he was trying to roll away from the tackle and not incur a sanction and also to avoid an injury.
Following a number of viewings of the video, Mr Betsen acknowledged that his boot made contact with Mr Dawson's head and further states that he was not aware of what was at his feet at the time.
Further, during the course of the evidence, Mr Maso on behalf of Mr Betsen said that there was no reaction from the England players.
Mr Maso then tendered in evidence two letters both dated 18 November 2003 as follows:
9. Letter from Jo Maso to Clive Woodward, the England coach, apologising for the injury to Matt Dawson;
10. Letter from Serge Betsen to Matt Dawson apologising for the incident and wishing him good luck in the final.
In the course of his submissions at the conclusion of Mr Betsen's evidence, Mr Maso states that he accepts that Mr Dawson received a kick in the head which caused a 2cm cut and that indicated a lack of intention on the part of Mr Betsen as if there had been an intention on his part it would have resulted in a much bigger cut.
This concluded the evidence on behalf of Mr Betsen.
The decision
The allegation set out in the Citing Commissioner's report is that Mr Betsen kicked his opponent. Mr Betsen acknowledges in the course of his evidence that his boot made contact with the head of Matt Dawson and there was no objection to the admission of the medical report of Dr Sharron Flahive dated 18 November 2003 which stated that following the incident Mr Dawson received a 2cm superficial laceration which required suturing.
He stated in his defence that he had no intention to hurt or injure the opposition player and that his actions were as a result of his efforts to roll away from the tackle and not incur a sanction in the course of which he was cleaned out by 2 other members of the opposition team causing his right ankle and knee to be wedged temporarily and in an effort to release himself from that position tried to push himself away with his feet.
From the evidence I have heard and the submissions made by Mr Maso and a viewing of the video on a number of occasions, I make a finding of fact that there was contact with Mr Dawson by Mr Betsen with his boot on 2 occasions virtually simultaneously.
The second contact was with the head of Mr Dawson causing the injury to him already referred to above. I am not satisfied that it was a deliberate act, particularly in light of the fact that Mr Betsen stated in his evidence that he had no intention to hurt or injure anyone.
However, neither am I satisfied that it was accidental and in my opinion it was a reckless act and his actions carried an obvious risk of a more serious injury than that which occurred and which was referred to by Mr Maso in his submissions to me. Mr Maso mentions the fact that no complaint was made by the English players at the time, however, it is noted in the report of match referee, Paddy O'Brien, that reference is made to the fact that immediately following the incident Matt Dawson said to him "did you see that?".
Mr Maso also makes reference to the fact that subsequent to the proceedings there was no complaint by the English management. However, I do not believe this is relevant to this hearing and accordingly, conclude as a matter of fact that Serge Betsen kicked Matt Dawson on the head. Having reached that conclusion and applying the standard of proof prescribed by rule 8.4 of the Tournament Disciplinary Programme, I find the Citing Complaint to be proved.
Penalty
A number of submissions were made to me on the issue of penalty including the fact that Mr Betsen is a professional rugby player earning his living to support his family and is due to play with his club next week and in the European Cup in 15 days time, thereby creating an impression that any suspension imposed on him would have financial consequences for him.
However, it is well documented that in matters of this nature, financial consequences arising from contractual arrangements players have with the clubs or unions are not matters to be taken into account in deciding penalties for foul play.
In assessing the appropriate penalty, I commenced with the view that the Citing Complaint was found to have been proved on the basis that the players actions showed a reckless use of the boot causing the injuries already outlined but no permanent damage has been caused to Mr Dawson and I understand he is available to take his place in the final of the World Cup on Saturday next.
The recommended sanctions for an offence of this nature are set out in Appendix 8 of the Tournament Disciplinary Programme with the recommended sanction for an offence of this nature being 18 weeks which I regard as the entry point and it is not my intention to give consideration to a period in excess of this time.
However, I do propose to discount an appropriate period arising from the mitigating circumstances which have been opened to me which include:
11. the letters of apology dated 18th November 2003 sent by Mr Maso and Mr Betsen to Clive Woodward and Matt Dawson, respectively.
12. Mr Betsen's apology at the very outset of this hearing,
13. his specific evidence that there was no intention on his part to hurt or injure anyone,
14. the nature and circumstances of the incident as described by him,
15. the fact that he has played rugby for 10 years and has been honoured with international representation for France on more than 30 occasions and in that period has had an unblemished record without any sanctions of any nature
16. and finally the testimony of Mr Maso's as to Mr Betsen's previous good character.
Thus, I intend to impose a suspension of 6 weeks from 17 November 2003 terminated on 29 December 2003.
The player is advised of his right to appeal according to the provisions of paragraph 15 of the Tournament Disciplinary Programme and the parties attention is drawn specifically to paragraph 15.1 which states that "A player may appeal to an appeal committee from a decision of a Judicial Officer.
Any appeal must be lodged with the designated Disciplinary Official or his nominee within 48 hours of the date in which the decision of the Judicial Officer has been notified to the party".
Dated at Sydney this 20th day of November, 2003
Brian McLoughlin
Solicitor
Judicial Officer