Very much doubt there is scope for civil action - these kinds of things have been tested in court before and tried and they tend not to work - I hope someone can call me a stupid anme and cite an example or two - that'd be really helpful - I said "tend not". If Civil action was practical, then Chev Walker 2 years ago would have sued the 2 tacklers when his leg broke, even though it wasn't intentional for the outcome. Same for Richie Owen and so on - Civil action is based on recovery and being responsible, not so much fault and justice - so I think thats a hot headed rumour.



Secondly, incredibly lucky to be categorised Grade C in my opinion, but thats the point and you can see it clearly on here- Opinions differ between thinking it was play on, to actually sending Chase to the Haigh for crimes against humanity. Personally 4/5 games feels about right.



It was a bad challenge, one can argue all day if it was deliberate, but the only person who knows is Rangi. Officials were close, very close and Mr Thaler is not one to leave his cards in the dressing room - so if there was a sniff, he would have acted. The Touchy didn't even give a penner - so polarised opinions abound, but it is not a hanging offense and it may not have been deliberate.



All that said, if Finn had followed through on Danny Orr like that, I would equally be suggesting he was deported.

Why is it Big Man. Accidents happen. I have opinions on the Chase/ropati incident but I don't sit on RFL disciplinary and I don't precide over civil actions so I will let guilt be decided by those people.



Regardless of club allegiances, are you saying being assaulted on a rugby field somehow exempts you from justice??

There are plenty of incidents in the amature game where the police have investigated allegations of assaults - and prosecuted!

It happens regularly at rugby union too and the game doesn't appear to be affected.



Step back from your defence of Rangi and allegiance to your club for a mo and try as hard as it might be to be objective - Is it right that a player can assault another and go seemingly unpunished whilst the assaulted player is put out of the game??

A lad playing for Nevvy was visited by the police after an incident just last weekend. The investigation is ongoing.

A player for Doncaster RUFC was arrested for assaulting a Wath RUFC player about ten years ago resulting in conviction. The father of the Wath player also got 18 months for his part in the ensuing brawl.

Selby Warriors RLFC have a player currently under investigation for an incident which I witnessed. It was nowt. Absolutely nowt. But the player feels he has a case and is seeking redress. It isn't my place to judge and my comments of "it's nowt" are meaningless in that process.





and that's why I'm reluctant to judge. It looked harsh but I'm not sitting in judgement. I'll let those on the panel do that.



But if a player feels agrieved, genuinely feels he has been assaulted, I don't see any problem with seeking redress.

If there is no guilt, there will be no action!

The Walker incident was a bit different as the tacklers' actions were within the rules of the game. Not saying I think civil action in this case is the way forward, just pointing out an obvious difference.

















The issue of whether it was deliberate is tricky, but judiciary panels are entitled to form an opinion based on the evidence they see. I know what mine would be based on the footage, but that will be up to the panel to determine.

Oh, I am not saying Roparti may not try, I am also not saying that it hasn't happen - I am suggesting it is rare and we need to be careful on what Civil action means versus criminal - there are a mix of them in the examples.



Investigating an assault is different to proving civil responsibility..... Which is why I made my example about the people in the act of tackling who broke the assorted legs - assault and police differs from being responsible for the result, be it deliberate or accidental.

I wonder if you would be of the same opinion of the "great shot" if It was you on the end of it.

Ging dong will correct me if I'm wrong but I believe a legal team is seeking fiscal redress for a player allegedly assaulted by a selby player. There is the civil action. I understand that a criminal investigation is running in tandem with that.



The actions at Wath RUFC (my old club) saw both successful criminal and civil actions taken against players/club official involved.



Can't make further comment on the lad from Nevvy

Makes sense that part, but that will be for loss of earnings away from the game, depends if the sport is your primary income and you are registered and insured as a professional or if you have a main job, which is impacted by your sporting injury.



There are margins for a claim there on the basis of loss responsibility, all pretty ugly for the game if that happens at this level..... we will see I guess.

I'd be tempted to use the phrase "WHAMMO"

Dont come on here talking Rugby union rar rar boys

, face facts RL is a tuff game players brake things, chase smashed one of your players in my view was fair shot, get over it! there ain't gunner be any criminal or civil action taken!!

"Brake things"

It doesn't matter whether you think it was fair or not. Others will decide guilt, not you or I.



You can't possibly know whether there will be any civil action. Have you spoken with Tangi yesterday or this morning??



Daft post.

Whether you approve of the court action or not, you'd have to admit that "Tangi vs Rangi" has a nice ring to it.



Would Ropati be insured if RL was his main income? Or would the club carry some sort of liability insurance for this? Accident in the workplace and all that.

I would have though 'all-cover' insurances were conditions of his visa?? Could be wrong though. I know when I looked to take up a nursing post in Canada many moons ago, I would have had to have all bases covered with Insurance for the duration of my visa.

Was that just for your liability though? Plus presumably you would have needed health insurance on account of the lack of NHS?

As stated, I needed all bases covered - an all circumstance policy(ies)!

Health, liability, inability to work, illness, etc! They simply would not consider granting temp/perm visas unless I had these in place first. I would have thought Tangi may well have such cover given his occupation puts him at risk of injury - costly too, but even most costly if you are not covered.

The RFL are doing their best to ruin this game , with superleague being a private members club etc . Bringing civil action into the fray will finish the game as a contest.



Whatever you think of Chases tackle , how many more mistimed or otherwise tackles do we see week in week out, none done with the intention severely injure the player. Will every tackler be hauled before the courts.



Do we really want this game to go tig and pass (or mostly kick) like union.



Time to let the authorities deal with it and stop using it to score brownie points, especially if its nowt to do with your team ........................................... capiche polecats ? Its a cas , fev thing so off you go back to your bucket collections

Agreed





Like it or not, it's here and has been for a long time.





No, just the one's judged to have committed an act worthy of action through the criminal or civil court.

Do I advocate this?? Well on balance, generally no. Because you then get the 'claim' culture spreading through the whole game - at a cost the game can ill afford.

However, there are so few such claims. Only the really severe one's will result in action. Was Chase's action that severe - again, my opinion means nowt. I won't be making that judgement.

If Tangi feels there is a claim and a need to persue his losses, he may well take such action, he may not. I'll bet he takes advice though - and by advice I mean pro advice not what some bloke from Rovrum or Cas thinks!!

C'mon, like knowing the full facts matters on RLFans.

To be honest (at the risk of interfering in a "cas, fev thing" - I'm not a "polecat" though) I wouldn't generally advocate legal proceedings outside the game's disciplinary, but you can't close the door on it altogether. There have to be limits to what you accept as "part of the game" and you can't just do whatever you want and be immune to prosecution because you did it on a rugby field.



I would personally feel that Chase's tackle remains within the confines of things the game should deal with. I may, of course, feel differently if it was my jaw and my income that was affected.

I think the powers that be legal or otherwise need to take all angles into consideration when deciding which road to take this down to be fair to all concerned..

good post

If he came to our offices for advise he would be told not to bother.



To sue someone for loss of earnings etc would mean he has no insurance (which I think every club has to have), if this turns out to be the case, his claim would be against Featherstone Rovers RLFC, not Rangi Chase as Featherstone Rovers have a duty of care and not having insurance to guarantee his wage is negligence.



Another note too, the majority of the thread on the VT is full of libelous material, here's why:

1. People are outright saying Rangi Chase deliberately attacked Tangi Ropati's head in a per-determined manner, this is easy as a claimant to be proven false (and there's enough on the video to show it was accidental).



2. Did it harm the claimant in anyway? Yes, it will have an effect on his work life and it may also possibly cause distress to his pregnant girl friend with the Facebook groups calling for him to be charged etc, this would also open up an emotional distress claim.



3. Well, you don't really need to show that it was written, there's a 20+ thread full of it.







That's how I'd wager it will stay too, it has been deemed reckless by the RFL, which is what most Cas fans had been saying. He will get a ban & fine and be warned about his technique.

Is it any easier to prove that there wasn't intent than it is to prove that there was? What the video shows is a somewhat subjective matter. To me it looks like there is intent, but it could hardly be said to be conclusive either way. Hypothetically (and I doubt it will happen as I'm sure he has better things to do) would Chase have to prove that the allegations were false, or would the libellous posters have to prove that they were true? (I ask as I assume you are in the legal trade - thankfully no anatomy

)



If it's libellous to say that I believe, based on what I've seen, that there was intent in the shot, then I'm guilty too. I wouldn't categorically say there certainly was, but is it really libel to express an opinion on an incident broadcast on TV?







Not sure what effect it will have on his work life? I don't think the disciplinary panel would admit to being influenced by internet message boards. I would think groups calling for him to be charged would only affect his girlfriend if she is exceptionally thin-skinned. If they go further than that and dip into insults and so forth, you would be correct (haven't seen the groups and don't want to).







Agree. We're back in the realms (like the Hargreaves tackle on Peacock on Good Friday) of Big Daft Lads getting carried away and not taking sufficient care and responsibility for their actions. It's not as if he planned the "attack" in advance.



Not sure about the "technique" part. If he intended to smash the guy in the face (and it's hard for me to imagine what else that flick of the elbow through the contact was trying to do, but the disciplinary will form their own view on that) then his technique was spot on....

"Burden of proof" goes to the person who made the remark.







No, that's opinion. The problem is the people who are claiming that it WAS premeditated and that he did mean to do it (these are the people saying he should be charged for it)



Having the opinion that you think it was intentional is different.







You could argue that the effect this will have on peoples reactions to him would effect his work performance, this is a weak argument but one I've actually seen work far too many times.



As for the girl friend thing, again, this is something that works a lot of the time because if you were in the position of being late in a pregnancy and people were calling for the father to be thrown in jail/deported I'd assume that would get to you.







When Chase goes for a big hit his arms raise, it's just his sloppy way of shoulder charging. 99% of the time it's fine but it only takes that 1% margin of error and something like this happens where a poor bloke gets his jaw smashed.