Rassie must pay the price for video rant
THE information vacuum surrounding the disciplinary hearing involving Rassie Erasmus has been filled for the past month by South African fans/ journalists peddling the line that “Rassie Is Innocent”. They contend the World Rugby charge that he has brought the game into disrepute is bogus, and that the SA director of rugby had nothing to do with leaking the hour-long video rant he produced in the wake of South Africa’s 22-17 First Test loss to the Lions in July, criticising Australian match referee Nic Berry.
The South African cohort also believes that the scathing, subjective attack by Erasmus directed at Berry and his fellow match officials was justified. The Rassie can-do-no-wrong brigade claims that World Rugby apparently agreed “behind-the-scenes” that 23 of the 26 so-called officiating “errors” he highlighted were justified.
World Rugby has made no statement confirming this claim, and sources with a close interest in the case believe the official view is that those figures are incorrect, and it has no intention of supporting them.
The narrative created in South Africa by the supporters of Erasmus is that Rassie was right to call out Berry’s multiple “mistakes”, and was doing the international game a much-needed service by doing so. It painted a picture of World Rugby seeing the light following the oral hearing convened by the disciplinary panel at the end of October which was requested by the 2019 World Cup-winning coach.
The Erasmus camp are suggesting that the inependent disciplinary panel, chaired by Christopher Quinlan QC, which includes two New Zealandbased lawyers, Nigel Hampton QC and district court judge Mike Mika, will clear the South African director of rugby of the charges brought by World Rugby over three months ago.
My understanding is that this is not likely to happen, with the panel’s decision, and full written judgement, imminent. It means that the Rassie fan club’s attempts to write a script which sees their hero exonerated will not sway the panel.
The attempt by Erasmus’ legal advisers to argue that he was not responsible for leaking the video to social media is also not expected to deflect the panel from addressing the main thrust of the World Rugby charge, which is that his comments publicly undermined referees, and the values and respect for the integrity of match officials, which are central to Rugby Union’s well-being.
The world governing body’s position that accompanied the charges was unambiguous: “Match officials are the backbone of the sport, and without them there is no game. World Rugby condemns any public criticism of their selection, performance or integrity, which undermines their role, the wellestablished and trust-based coach-officials feedback process, and, more importantly, the values that are at the heart of the sport”.
It is essential, that World Rugby defends those principles, and that it should not be deflected from doing so by the smokescreen that the Erasmus video was intended for a limited audience of rugby administrators and officials. The disciplinary panel will no doubt find it curious that at the start of the video there was a muddled address by Erasmus concerning the unavailability of the various World Rugby officials that he should have been submitting any complaints to. They will ask why he made this reference unless there was the likelihood of the tape going out to a much wider audience?
Such anomalies will draw the attention of Quinlan, who is a criminal, sports, and regulatory barrister with a highly impressive and comprehensive record. One of his testimonials says: “A powerhouse advocate who has incredible attention to detail”.
It is not ideal for rugby controversies to fester, but, with Erasmus taking legal advice, the scrutiny required in reaching a decision goes some way to explaining the delay. Also, the panel members are unpaid, and have day jobs which require their attention.
The 62 minute Erasmus video has all the hallmarks of one made for public consumption. It was unlike the usual written technical disagreements with refereeing calls, with short video clips attached, which international coaches normally submit to World Rugby’s refereeing department.
Erasmus overstepped boundaries that are there for important reasons. Consider the impact on referee recruitment if you were to permit a culture of video assassination of referees by coaches who invariably have a clear bias towards their own teams. It would have a catastrophic impact with referees leaving the sport,
Erasmus has many admirable qualities, but he also makes mistakes. The video was one of them, and his waterboy role is another. The legendary status he has attained in South Africa after coaching the Springboks to World Cup victory in 2019 should not exempt him from being brought to book by a panel with the best interests of this sport at heart.
“The 62 minute Erasmus video has all the hallmarks of one made for public consumption”