Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

4-year anti-doping ban for England grassroots player

(Photo by Amilcar Orfali/Getty Images)

Amateur player Ralph Rainbow has been banned from all sport for four years, from September 30, 2020, until September 29, 2024, following a first anti-doping rule violation (ADRV).

ADVERTISEMENT

On July 12, 2018, UK Border Force seized a package en route to Rainbow’s home address which contained items used in the process of injecting human growth hormone. Human growth hormone is a prohibited substance in accordance with the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list 2018.

In an interview with UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) on January 16, 2020, Rainbow admitted he had attempted to purchase a prohibited substance to enable him to continue playing rugby.

Video Spacer

Wales’ Dan Lydiate guests on RugbyPass Offload

Video Spacer

Wales’ Dan Lydiate guests on RugbyPass Offload

Rainbow was charged by the Rugby Football Union with two violations – possession (by purchase) and use/attempted use. The case was referred to the independent National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP) by the RFU for determination. Rainbow did not contest the charges.

RFU anti-doping and illicit drugs programme manager Stephen Watkins said: “All rugby players are subject to the anti-doping rules which are in place to protect players and the integrity of our sport.”

The eight-page document explaining the decision that was reached stated: “The panel finds that whilst the player never physically came into possession of a prohibited substance, the evidence submitted by the RFU is sufficient to conclude that, by asking a third party to order the prohibited substance on his behalf to an address over which he maintained control, the player intended to exercise control over a prohibited substance thus constituting effective possession by purchase.

“The panel also finds that the violation of WR regulation 21.2.6 was intentional. In this regard, the panel notes, it is the player who has the burden of proving that the ADRV was not intentional or was justified as defined by WR regulation 21.2.6.2. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“As the player has made no submissions to this effect and has not contested the charges against him, the player has failed to discharge this burden. Accordingly, the panel finds that the period of Ineligibility as regards the possession by purchase of a prohibited substance is four years.”

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

T
Tom 5 hours ago
What is the future of rugby in 2025?

Briiiiiiiiiiiiiiiistol! Briiiiiiiiiiiiiiiistol! Briiiiiiiiiiiiiiiistol!


It's incredible to see the boys playing like this. Back to the form that saw them finish on top of the regular season and beat Toulon to win the challenge cup. Ibitoye and Ravouvou doing a cracking Piutau/Radradra impression.


It's abundantly clear that Borthwick and Wigglesworth need to transform the England attack and incorporate some of the Bears way. Unfortunately until the Bears are competing in Europe, the old criticisms will still be used.. we failed to fire any punches against La Rochelle and Leinster which goes to show there is still work to do but both those sides are packed full of elite players so it's not the fairest comparison to expect Bristol to compete with them. I feel Bristol are on the way up though and the best is yet to come. Tom Jordan next year is going to be obscene.


Test rugby is obviously a different beast and does Borthwick have enough time with the players to develop the level of skill the Bears plays have? Even if he wanted to? We should definitely be able to see some progress, Scotland have certainly managed it. England aren't going to start throwing the ball around like that but England's attack looks prehistoric by comparison, I hope they take some inspiration from the clarity and freedom of expression shown by the Bears (and Scotland - who keep beating us, by the way!). Bristol have the best attack in the premiership, it'd be mad for England to ignore it because it doesn't fit with the Borthwick and Wigglesworth idea of how test rugby should be played. You gotta use what is available to you. Sadly I think England will try reluctantly to incorporate some of these ideas and end up even more confused and lacking identity than ever. At the moment England have two teams, they have 14 players and Marcus Smith. Marcus sticks out as a sore thumb in a team coached to play in a manner ideologically opposed to the way he plays rugby, does the Bears factor confuse matters further? I just have no confidence in Borthers and Wiggles.


Crazy to see the Prem with more ball in play than SR!

5 Go to comments
J
JW 9 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

In another recent article I tried to argue for a few key concept changes for EPCR which I think could light the game up in the North.


First, I can't remember who pointed out the obvious elephant in the room (a SA'n poster?), it's a terrible time to play rugby in the NH, and especially your pinnacle tournament. It's been terrible watching with seemingly all the games I wanted to watch being in the dark, hardly able to see what was going on. The Aviva was the only stadium I saw that had lights that could handle the miserable rain. If the global appeal is there, they could do a lot better having day games.


They other primary idea I thuoght would benefit EPCR most, was more content. The Prem could do with it and the Top14 could do with something more important than their own league, so they aren't under so much pressure to sell games. The quality over quantity approach.


Trim it down to two 16 team EPCR competitions, and introduce a third for playing amongst the T2 sides, or the bottom clubs in each league should simply be working on being better during the EPCR.


Champions Cup is made up of league best 15 teams, + 1, the Challenge Cup winner. Without a reason not to, I'd distribute it evenly based on each leauge, dividing into thirds and rounded up, 6 URC 5 Top14 4 English. Each winner (all four) is #1 rank and I'd have a seeding round or two for the other 12 to determine their own brackets for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. I'd then hold a 6 game pool, home and away, with consecutive of each for those games that involve SA'n teams. Preferrably I'd have a regional thing were all SA'n teams were in the same pool but that's a bit complex for this simple idea.


That pool round further finalises the seeding for knockout round of 16. So #1 pool has essentially duked it out for finals seeding already (better venue planning), and to see who they go up against 16, 15,etc etc. Actually I think I might prefer a single pool round for seeding, and introduce the home and away for Ro16, quarters, and semis (stuffs up venue hire). General idea to produce the most competitive matches possible until the random knockout phase, and fix the random lottery of which two teams get ranked higher after pool play, and also keep the system identical for the Challenge Cup so everthing is succinct. Top T2 side promoted from last year to make 16 in Challenge Cup

207 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Ex-Wallaby explains why All Blacks aren’t at ‘panic stations’ under Razor Ex-Wallaby explains why All Blacks aren’t at ‘panic stations’
Search