We should take the two matters together. After a bruising, butting, and possibly even biting Allied Dunbar Premiership match between Newcastle and Leicester on Monday, the RFU, England's controlling body, is to set up an enquiry into internationalist Will Greenwood being sent off for illegal use of the head, and, possibly, for Leicester flanker Neil Back being involved in an alleged biting incident.
There is growing concern over the Tri-Nations tournament this summer involving South Africa, New Zealand, and Australia. This is because the South African National Sports Council points out that absolutely no progress has been made towards integrating more non-white players into the Springboks' international squad. They would therefore like the competition called off.
What is the common denominator? In both these cases, we are
witnessing a recently professionalised sport apparently determined to destroy its own image in the pursuit of profit. Rugby, where once the referees' decisions were unquestionable, and the after-match socialising was a fundamental part of the philosophy of the game, in is in danger of becoming seen as a very dirty business.
These are hardly isolated incidents. Scotland's Doddie Weir almost had his career curtailed by a vicious, off-the-ball kick during the Lions' tour of South Africa last year.
Earlier this season, Kevin Yates, the Bath prop, was suspended for six months, having been found guilty of biting off a portion of the ear belonging to Simon Fenn of London Scottish. Pictures from Monday's match would suggest that Newcastle's Paul van-Zandvliet was intent on mouthing the side of Back's head, even though Back's club Leicester have decided not to take the matter further.
Off the field, the sport has hardly been any more sanitised. The English clubs and the RFU continue their civil war, with the participation of the former in next season's European competitions still in doubt. The threat of bankruptcy is a real one to some of those who have paid vast sums to overseas mercenaries.
Scotland's clubs look to the future with diminished ambitions, their leading players required to move to hastily rearranged district squads. Not all the leading contenders have made themselves available for the Scots' tour to Australia.
The situation in South Africa is potentially explosive. Under the presidency of Dr Louis Luyt, SARFU, the governing body, has behaved as though blacks were still second-class citizens. That cannot be allowed to go on indefinitely and the rugby community should not co-operate with the South Africans unless they begin to put their house in order. If that means cancelling tours and competitions, so be it.
If ever the game requires self-discipline it is now. The International Board has to start by behaving like a real force and less like a post-Colonial tea party. They should be telling the Springboks that apartheid is over and that there is no place in the game for a one-race international team.
Throughout the rugby world, it should be made abundantly clear that certain foul practices will not be tolerated. Folk who bite people should be in jail, not allowed to take part in what is supposed to be a civilised pastime.
Similarly, those who perpetrate grievous bodily harm on opponents should be outlawed from the international scene. If the domestic authorities will not take action - and, let it be noted, the SRU have an impeccable record - then the IB must take powers to itself.
I have been writing about rugby for 30 years and played it for a good while before that. To be frank, I was always concerned about how it would develop as a professional sport. There are so many hiding places for evil-doers in scrums, mauls, rucks, and line-outs that I worried about how it could be effectively policed.
These fears have been borne out. Players are bigger, stronger and are capable of inflicting frightening injuries. I am appaled at the number of instances, after a try has been scored, when the player who has touched down is hit by a late tackle. Referees need to watch out for this foul practice.
However, referees also require official backing. The governing bodies have to speak out, not just about foul play, but also about dissent, the arguments about decisions, the whining that goes on after matches.
Sadly, there are those in rugby, some of them with caps to their credit, who think the odd punch, the wee stamp, the crack on the face with the elbow, should be tolerated in what is a very physical sport. They are hurting the game they profess to care about.
If you were a mother, or a father, looking at the picture of one young man apparently attempting to sink his teeth into another, who is in no position to defend himself, would you want your kids to play rugby?
Professional sports have to have clear definitions of what is acceptable. In rugby, if you raise your hands or your feet in anger, if you butt or bite, you should be sent off to find another activity.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article