Club doctor may yet be the biggest casualty

WHETHER THE great and the good at Twickenham like it or not, yesterday’s ERC judgment is unlikely to be the last we’ve heard of the so-called “Bloodgate” scandal as English rugby’s summer of shame lurches on.

The shockwaves from Richards’s botched attempt to cheat Leinster out of a Heineken Cup semi-final have already been felt well beyond the boundaries of The Stoop and are set to reverberate for some time to come.

Two careers already lie in tatters, a third could still end in ruin. Wendy Chapman, the club doctor who is alleged to have cut Williams’ lip with a scalpel in a panicked attempt at cover-up, may have escaped sanction from the ERC but could yet turn out to be the affair’s biggest casualty.

The appeal panel decided it did not have the jurisdiction to consider a misconduct charge against Chapman. But the accident and emergency worker at Maidstone Hospital in Kent is facing the prospect of an inquiry from the General Medical Council (GMC).

It is quite possible that she could be struck off.

In his evidence, Richards, a former policeman, said he would never have countenanced the cutting of any player, referring to the act as “tantamount to GBH”. The GMC has yet to confirm whether it has launched an investigation while Chapman herself has refused to comment for legal reasons.

Chapman aside, there is plenty of smoke still to clear.

Harlequins escaped any further punishment following a board meeting of the ERC yesterday, with the European authorities happy to abide by the appeals panel’s decision.

“As a consequence of the decisions reached by the independent Appeal Committee and the significant sanction imposed on the club (a €300,000 fine), the board saw no reason to interfere with the participation of Harlequins in the 2009/10 Heineken Cup,” the ERC said.

“However, the board went on to express its concern with many of the issues and practices raised as part of the investigation and in the hearings and their implications for the wider game.”

And what of the RFU? Richards might not have been able to recall the specifics of previous incidences of faking blood injuries in the English league at the club but Steph Brennan, the physio banned for two years, certainly could.

Armed with the details, what action do the RFU take?

For the moment, they appear happy to leave the ball in the ERC’s court.

But for how long?

“We have now received all the written decisions from European Rugby Cup relating to the conduct of Harlequins, its officials and Tom Williams on April 12th,” they said in a statement yesterday.

“We will review that documentation thoroughly.”

There remains a larger elephant in the room, however, for the authorities to deal with.

In an ill-advised attempt at damage limitation, Harlequins began pointing fingers when it became clear the game was up.

Richards admitted he’d become aware of the technique during a stint in Grenoble and saw little wrong with the practice.

Everyone else is doing it, so why can’t we was the excuse. Surely the only offence was getting caught.

Simply keeping up with the Joneses, M’lud.

The club launched an internal inquiry, where unnamed players spoke in hushed tones of nefarious goings-on at previous clubs.

The old “blood on the towel” trick has been doing the rounds for years but this was different.

Not only were fake blood capsules being used systematically, players were being cut behind the ear and stitched before games.

The wound could then be re-opened if and when a blood replacement was required.

But perhaps most troubling of all for officials at Twickenham, the England team itself has been dragged into the controversy with reports emerging from the Harlequins inquiry of international players employing similar tactics during the Six Nations. If true, the implications for the game would be huge. Given that Harlequins conducted their interviews under the guarantee of anonymity, the chances of a whistleblower coming forward are slim.

But the RFU’s newly-formed Image of the Game Task Group is sure to take the claims seriously and pressure will be exerted on Harlequins to explain exactly where these allegations are coming from.

The IRB are also monitoring the situation.

“We will be maintaining a watching brief,” they confirmed earlier in the week.

Where exactly we go from here is anybodies guess. But regardless of the final outcome, the whole sorry sage has left an indelible, bloody stain on the fabric of the game.