RFU warrns Tom Arscott on passing information to his brother

Rugby Football Union has issued a written warning to former Sale Sharks player Tom Arscott on passing information to his brother Luke ahead of the Aviva Premiership clash against Bristol on New Year's day.

Earlier, last month Sale Sharks suspended the 29-year-old following which the club's rugby director Steve Diamond revealed that Tom allegedly passed on the information to Luke, who features for Bristol in a meeting at the club's hotel in the west country city.

Following an investigation conducted, RFU stated on Monday that Tom's behaviour was inappropriate even though the offence was on the lower scale of seriousness and he was charged with a breach of RFU regulation 17 (anti-corruption and betting) but the board failed to find any evidence on him involving in betting.

After Sale Sharks raised a complaint to the board on 17th January, RFU questioned 25 players from both the clubs and also inquired with various betting operators on any breach of regulation 17.

"Tom Arscott discussed tactical information with his brother Luke Arscott ahead of the match," an RFU statement read.

"This information related to Sale using some backs in their lineout on occasion and that another back would be defending in a different position at times.

"The RFU has determined that this information, while at the lower end of the scale of seriousness, falls within the definition of inside information (as per regulation 17.2).

"But in the absence of any evidence of betting or fixing, there had not been a breach of RFU regulation 17.

"However, the RFU has deemed that Tom Arscott's behaviour was inappropriate and the player has received a written warning for his conduct and he will be required to undertake a relevant World Rugby education module."

The statement further clarified on the type of information that was passed on to Bristol but cleared the Ashton Gate club of acting as per the information.

"Information that was passed from Tom Arscott to Luke Arscott regarding the proposed defensive structure in the Sale back line was provided to two Bristol coaches.

"However, in the absence of any evidence of a suspicion of fixing/betting etc, the RFU has determined that Bristol did not fail to comply with the relevant reporting requirements in relation to the inside information that the club received.

"There was no evidence to demonstrate that Bristol changed any of their game strategy to deal with Sale's defensive positional changes."

Bristol head coach Mark Tainton was disappointed with the accusations made earlier and is relieved that the investigation finally came to an end as the club is battling to retain their place in the Premiership.

"We're glad that this matter has finally been put to bed," he said in a statement. "It's been of significant distraction to the coaches and playing squad during an important period of the season.

"As well as training days lost due to the RFU investigation - where individuals were interviewed at length at the training base - the club have also incurred legal costs as part of ensuring our interests were protected.

"We were disappointed to be wrongly accused and that the complaint was made public at such an early stage in the process. Bristol Rugby knew at all times that we were innocent of any wrongdoing. We are pleased that this has now been confirmed.

"We draw a line under this now and focus on what is important: keeping this club in the top flight."

RFU head of discipline Gerard McEvilly stated that the punishment handed to Tom will set a strong example to the other players.

"In determining what action should be taken following the investigation, we have taken into account that Tom Arscott has already paid a heavy price for his conduct in having been dismissed from his employment by Sale Sharks.

"These issues have arisen because of the inappropriate sharing of information while players were socialising in the same hotel before the match.

"Therefore, the RFU is strongly recommending to both clubs that all their players are reminded of their contractual and ethical obligations to their employing clubs and of the problems that may arise should confidential/inside information be passed between individuals."