Etzebeth face long ban for eye-contact incident

Springbok lock Eben Etzebeth may face a long ban following his permanent red card against Wales in Cardiff on Saturday night.

Television replays showed that Etzebeth, in a scuffle with Welsh player Alex Mann, put his finger in the eye of Mann, prompting French referee Luke Ramos to give him a permanent red card.

A red card means that Etzebeth will have to face a disciplinary committee and now it depends on how the incident is charged before he goes into this process.

World Rugby can charge him with making contact with the eye area - or contact with the eyes.

The different interpretations are important as they carry very different sanctions for players who are charged.

The laws of rugby union, as written by World Rugby, define foul play as: "Anything a player does within the playing enclosure that is against the letter and spirit of the Laws of the Game.

It includes obstruction, unfair play, repeated infringements, dangerous play and misconduct which is prejudicial to the Game".

Specifically, they state that "A player must not do anything that is dangerous to the opponent".

Word Rugby Regulations provide for punishment for contact with eyes or the eye area of an opponent.

The difference in sanctions is shown below:

Contact with the eyes

• Lower end: up to 12-week ban.

• Mid range: up to 18-week ban.

• Top end: greater than 24-week ban.

Contact with the eye area

• Lower end: up to 4-week ban.

• Mid range: up to 8-week ban.

• Top end: greater than 12-week ban.

The maximum sanction for either is a 156-week (3 year) ban.

That is why it is so important what Etzebeth is charged with and how SA Rugby fight the case. 

The Springboks already received two permanent red cards on this tour and while Franco Mostert’s one was rescinded, their discipline has not been their best factor on their trip to Europe.

What will also be important is what led to the fracas, although it may count as mitigation for Etzebeth, his actions will be seen as damning and will influence the disciplinary’s position.