AfriPulse
Jan-Hendrik Wessels has returned to South Africa from London where he was with the Springbok squad after his appeal to overturn a nine-week ban failed.
The Bulls are weighing up their legal options after hooker Jan-Hendrik Wessels’ nine week ban for allegedly grabbing and twisting the genitals of Connacht’s Josh Murphy, was stonewalled by an appeals panel.
“We’re looking at legal options,” was all Bulls CEO Edgar Rathbone would offer at this stage.
On Wednesday, 29 October 2025, an independent appeal committee led by Roddy MacLeod (Scotland) as chairperson alongside Achille Reali (Italy) and Robert Milligan KC (Scotland) sided with the original decision .
They also refused the Bulls’ request to have the entire process be reheard.
The United Rugby Championship (URC) appeals committee upheld the original decision to ban Wessels, but reduced his sentence from nine weeks to eight.
“The basis of such an appeal requires an appellant to demonstrate that the first instance disciplinary panel erred in its findings,” a statement from the appeals panel said. “After reviewing the grounds of appeal and hearing from the player and his club the appeal committee dismissed the substantive grounds of appeal, but reduced the ban by one week.”
The one week reduction is laughable. It was a crumb thrown to the Bulls based on “the player’s (Wessels’) conduct in the context of the case”.
What does that even mean? The appeals committee was not even present at the original hearing. This decision, made purely based on testimony from the two players and the opinion of the match Citing Commissioner, sets an uncomfortable precedent.
Read more : URC’s disciplinary process questioned as Wessels controversially banned despite lack of visual evidence
Peter Ferguson, the Irish Citing Commissioner, admitted he did not actually see the incident occur. An incident that Wessels denies. Ferguson’s written testimony submitted to the original disciplinary panel, along with Murphy’s version of events, was deemed enough to tarnish Wessels with a serious black mark against his name for the remainder of his career.
Double standard
There appears to be a double standard here as well as many worrying holes in the testimony of key witnesses.
Murphy was unclear in his submission about the duration of the incident. He originally stated it was for about “five seconds”. Then he changed it to “three seconds”.
There was no video evidence to corroborate Murphy’s version, and remember, Wessels denies he did it.
Ferguson’s statement is also vague. He claims Wessels’ arm moved in an “unnatural” way and was “unnecessary”. That is a bold claim relating to a dynamic situation such as a ruck.
Bok captain Siya Kolisi clashes with Tom Curry of England during a Rugby World Cup France 2023 match against England at Stade de France on 21 October 2023 in Paris. (Photo: Cameron Spencer / Getty Images)
Bongi Mbonambi is likely to be called up to the Boks now that Wessels’ ban has been confirmed. (Photo: RvS.Media / Sylvie Failletaz / Getty Images)
Murphy reacted to the alleged assault (the fact that the media must use the word ‘alleged’ in reporting is telling as nothing has been proven) by striking Wessels. For that he was red-carded, which was unbelievably rescinded, thus setting another dangerous precedent.
It has basically come down to the panel believing Murphy’s version over that of Wessels.
At Rugby World Cup 2023, England flank Tom Curry claimed Bok hooker Bongi Mbonambi had racially abused him during the semi-final clash.
It created a media storm, and led to a World Rugby investigation. While the substance of the accusation was different (an alleged verbal attack versus a physical one), the legal process faced the same hurdles as the Wessels/Murphy case.
Essentially it came down to “he said, he said.”
This was World Rugby’s finding after its investigation into Curry’s claims: “Having considered all the available evidence, including match footage, audio and evidence from both teams, the governing body has determined that there is insufficient evidence at this time to proceed with charges.
“Therefore, the matter is deemed closed unless additional evidence comes to light.”
Quite frankly, that should have been the result of the Wessels case.
The Bulls requested a completely new hearing (de novo), but the URC appeals committee brushed this request off on the basis that there were “no exceptional circumstances” to allow for a new hearing.
It added to the sense that this was a closing of ranks by the URC
Bok problem
While the outcome is a blow for Wessels personally, as his reputation is forever tarnished, there are also consequences for the Bulls and Springboks.
The Bulls will be without Wessels for three matches while the Boks lose his services for the five-Test northern hemisphere tour, which starts against Japan at Wembley this weekend.
Source: DailyMaverick | Read the Full Story…
