In light of his conviction for common assault and resisting arrest, Gloucester back Danny Cipriani was on Friday charged with conduct prejudicial to the interests of the game contrary to RFU Rule 5.12.
Danny Cipriani appeared before an independent disciplinary panel on Wednesday charged with conduct prejudicial to the interests of the game contrary to RFU Rule 5.12. This followed his conviction for common assault and resisting arrest in Jersey on 16 August 2018.
Cipriani contested the charge but the panel comprising Gareth Graham (chair) with Mike Curling and Olly Kohn decided to uphold it. The panel imposed no further sanction over and above Gloucester’s sanction and actions of the court.
“Danny Cipriani is expected to behave in line with the core values of the game.”
— England Rugby (@EnglandRugby) August 22, 2018
“Danny Cipriani is expected to behave in line with the core values of the game which include respect and discipline,” said panel chair Gareth Graham.
“Those core values are not empty words or slogans as the panel were reminded during the hearing.
“By his guilty plea before the criminal court, Mr Cipriani accepts that he behaved in a way that, in the panel’s view, fell below the standard of behaviour expected of a rugby player. The panel were supported in reaching that decision by Gloucester Rugby’s own internal disciplinary hearing finding that his behaviour fell below the standard that the club expects.
“Mr Cipriani is a role model and by committing an act of common assault and by resisting arrest, the panel find his actions are prejudicial to the interests of the game.
“The panel took in to account the sanction imposed upon Mr Cipriani by the court and the sanction imposed by Gloucester Rugby and when considering the totality of both, do not impose any further sanction.
“However, the panel do not agree that this is a ‘minor’ incident or ‘trivial’ and whilst they endorse the actions of Gloucester Rugby in fining Mr Cipriani and ordering that he complete 10 hours of work in the community, find that the decision of the RFU to bring a charge under Rule 5.12 was appropriate.”
Details on RFU Rule 5.12 can be found here (please see page six)