The Betsen Incident: Were all Bets Off?

Natural Injustice
By Le Stylo Sauvage
February 16 2005

Biarritz, January 15, 2005. We're twenty minutes into a tight and keenly fought Heineken Cup tie between Biarritz Olympique and London Wasps. The winners of the final pool 1 match will top the group and go on to the quarter finals.

The losers would not necessarily be out but progress would depend on other results. It is one try apiece and London Wasps are three points down and on the counter attack around Biarritz's ten metre line.

Stuart Abbott receives a pass and steps smartly off his right foot as he accelerates. Serge Betsen, closing in on him apace, is completely wrong-footed but manages to bring his man down thereby snuffing out an attack that looked to have penetrated Biarritz's defensive line. Nicolas Brusque at fullback is a relieved man, as a potential try has been thwarted.

Play continues and BOPB win turn over ball. Abbott lies in a crumpled heap, writhing in agony. No one on the side of the pitch had the faintest clue what had just occurred, and neither did the referee or the touch judges. The England man has broken his leg so cleanly that it is undetectable to the naked eye. Wasps' doctor encourages him to stand on it. It is soon apparent that Abbott is not able to continue and he is carted of to hospital where the break is confirmed.

The interval arrives with the teams level on eight points each but Wasps are unable to get back on the front foot much in the second half and go down to an 18-15 defeat. Our defence of the Heineken Cup ends.

Abbott's injury may have been a key turning point, as if Wasps had gone ahead and turned the screw, another famous away victory may have followed, together with a home tie in the quarter finals.

The supporters' after-match meal embodies all that is great about the game. Rugby's entente cordiale is alive and well.

However, the question of the Betsen incident remained to be answered. A player has had his season cut short and his golden opportunities of Six Nations' and Lions' spots scythed away. Video evidence and press photographs indicate that a citing is in order. But the ERC's wheels of justice are slow and convoluted. The case is to be heard but it is more than three weeks before it in session.

Betsen has got his defence in early: "I didn't intend to do anyone any harm - I'm really sorry for him. A tough sanction would not be fair," he told French newspaper L'Equipe. It seems that the disciplinary panel agreed with him:

9 February 2005, 7:43 pm ERC Press Release: Betsen citing case result

An independent Disciplinary Committee met in Glasgow today (Wednesday, 9 February) to hear the citing complaint brought by London Wasps against Serge Betsen, of Biarritz Olympique, for alleged illegal/foul play in the Heineken Cup Round 6 match between Biarritz Olympique and London Wasps on Saturday, 15 January.

The citing complaint by London Wasps was made on Monday, 17 January. The independent Citing Commissioner took the decision on Wednesday, 19 January that there was a case to answer. A preliminary hearing was staged on Wednesday, 2 February, to consider whether the citing complaint was valid and could proceed, when the Match referee had stated that he had seen the incident in question, but had not detected any illegal or foul play. The independent Disciplinary Committee found that the citing complaint was valid and should go to a full hearing.

After today's hearing, at which witness statements, video and photographic evidence were considered and Betsen appeared in person, the independent Disciplinary Committee found that the player did commit an act of illegal or foul play, namely a deliberate trip of the London Wasps centre Stuart Abbott. This contravened Law 10-4(d) of the Laws of the Game.

However, it also found that the trip, while intentional, was not premeditated and had been carried out "in the heat of the moment". The panel decided the offence would not have warranted Betsen being ordered off the field of play if detected by the referee. As a result, the citing complaint was not upheld and no suspension or other sanction was imposed on the player.

No award was made as to costs of either party.

The independent Disciplinary Committee was made up of Rod McKenzie, Chairman (SRU), Professor Lorne Crerar (SRU) and Dr. Barry O'Driscoll (IRFU).

The ruling seems to sit on both sides of the fence! An offence was committed but punishment would not have followed. In effect, any player has been given carte-blanche to do a similar act with impunity. Cartes jaune ou rouge would not have been merited, apparently. Even in the event of a professional foul?

Several questions remain unanswered, the most pressing being just what is meant by the words: it also found that the trip, while intentional, was not premeditated and had been carried out "in the heat of the moment"? If you have any point of view to proffer ERC, you might care to try: ERC's feedback web page, whilst the club divines what is the right response.

In closing, pictures may well paint a thousand words, but lawyers and commissioners can easily cast a veil over what looks unjust, unnatural and clear-cut. So, here are two telling photographs: