We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.
RUGBY UNION

The Dylan Hartley ban: fair

Fair: red card and six-week ban were deserved but now it’s time to move on
Standing tall: Ian Ritchie’s bold statements before Hartley’s hearing had even taken place were preposterous
Standing tall: Ian Ritchie’s bold statements before Hartley’s hearing had even taken place were preposterous
DAVID ROGERS

A few hours after Dylan Hartley was banned for six weeks, a New Zealand radio station phoned for an instant reaction. “Six weeks, mate, that has him back just in time for the Six Nations, doesn’t it?” There’s the perception — albeit from a country that didn’t see much wrong with the shoulder charge of Sam Cane that should have been red in Dublin — of much of the rugby world.

England were at it again, with their money, influence and Richard Smith QC, bending the rules for their own self-interest. Outside England, Ian Ritchie compounded the sense of indignation with his staunch pre-trial defence of Hartley. The skipper might have 54 weeks’ form as a Northampton Saint but he was whiter than white with England.

Hartley should have been banned longer and stripped of the England captaincy, so goes the story. Sorry, but I can’t buy that. Hartley’s red card was not one of the more stomach-turning of red card incidents. It was stupid, silly, vindictive and deserved red.

It merited the mid-point five-week ban. He was given an extra fortnight for his poor record before having one week reduced for his unblemished record under Eddie Jones. The six-week ban was a fair verdict. England cannot be criticised for employing a QC to act on behalf of the national captain and what Jones regards as his team’s interests.

But can Ritchie and Jones be berated for some lack of morality? Is there an end point at which players must be cast from the tower, left to rot in their own filthy play? Well, I confess to being at the front of the Jamie George fan club and would love to see him installed sooner than later as England’s hooker. But to see Hartley at the head of the team in training, and hear the praise with which his manager has endorsed him, is to accept that he is doing a lot right as England captain.

Advertisement

We had enough of this example-setting role-model rubbish from the last regime. Results drive the sport and dictate the number of newcomers who will take up the game, primarily the kids as players but also adults as supporters.

Winning might not be everything but it is a great deal. To cast off a man Jones sees as instrumental to the evolution of this exciting England team would be an act of vandalism, not some well-meaning moral act.

If Jones believes Hartley is important enough to be retained as captain — for all the questions surrounding his form — that is good enough for me. England recruited the Australian to create a winning team, not role models. Ritchie gave him a brief to make England successful again, not to pick flawless human beings.

A 2017 Grand Slam and the latest headlines will be on the backburner along with the other offences until the time comes for another dose of righteous indignation. Do England fans want a winning team or one of which they can be proud?

When a team lose their way nobody other than friends and family care whether they are nice guys or not. When a team are winning, who roots around to find the personal skeletons under the players’ covers?

Advertisement

This year has been one long celebration of Jones and his team. It will be the same until they start losing, or until Jones feels that the time is right for a change at hooker and captain. This is a professional sport, a business where Machiavellian practice prevails, with few finer exponents of the art of Italian diplomacy than Jones, who will do what he thinks is right to keep the team winning.

What do the public want from Jones — another Grand Slam or an act of sacrifice whereby he drops someone whom he regards as one of the most instrumental players in the squad? What would you prefer, (assuming you are English)? England doing what some consider the decent thing and saying: “Enough is enough, old boy, that’s one too many red cards?”

We’ve been here before. Hartley was dumped from the 2015 World Cup squad for butting Jamie George. It was one red card too many for the decent Stuart Lancaster.

Jones’ job is to win matches, not to mollify a few critics. Had Hartley attacked someone in the street we would have entered another equation altogether but one more thuggish moment in club colours is neither here nor there. This country doesn’t need role models, it needs winners.