Updated ,first published
Organisers of a controversial collision sports competition will be forced to cancel their next event after the NSW Supreme Court refused to overturn a decision by the state regulator for combat sport on Thursday.
The Run Nation Championship (RNC) is a competition in which two contestants, predominantly former rugby league or union players, run at each other and collide at speed in front of spectators.
Health experts have warned the sport is potentially life-threatening, but organisers have claimed the competition is a safer version of the “run it straight” trend which resulted in the death of a 19-year-old in New Zealand last year.
The next RNC event was slated to be held at the Royal Randwick Racecourse on Saturday, but last month – as revealed by this masthead – the NSW Combat Sports Authority sent organisers a notice to cancel it.
In a bid to overturn that decision, organisers took the regulator to the NSW Supreme Court, arguing their event was not a combat sport as defined by the Combat Sports Act 2013.
The act, which gives the regulator the power to stop the event, defines combat sport as any sport, martial art or activity where the primary objective is for one combatant to strike, kick, hit, grapple with, throw or punch one or more other combatants.
The matter was heard on Tuesday before Justice Andrew Coleman delivered his judgment on Thursday afternoon, dismissing RNC’s attempt to overturn the notice and ordering them to pay the costs of the regulator.
“The wording in the [RNC code of rules] describing the contact as a ‘tackle’ cannot alter the fact that RNC is a collision sport. The collision can appropriately and comfortably be described as a strike or hit within the broad meaning of those words in the definition of ‘combat sport’ in the act,” Coleman wrote in his judgment.
“The question then becomes whether the primary objective of each combatant in a contest under the code is to strike or hit the other combatant. In my opinion, it is overwhelmingly clear that this question must be answered ‘yes’.”
RNC will now need a permit from the Combat Sports Authority to hold competitions. Permits must be lodged more than 28 days before an event.
Outside the Supreme Court, RNC co-founder and chief executive Tremaine Fernandez said the judgment was not the end of the competition and Saturday’s event would be postponed.
“Some people love the sport, some people hate it and some people have called for it to be banned. One thing that we want to make extremely clear here today is this hearing was not about Run Nation Championship being banned,” Fernandez said.
“Something that’s been portrayed in the media is that RNC was not going to be a sport any more. RNC is here to stay, and based on the ruling today, we’re excited to work with the [Combat Sports Authority] and the opportunities that may bring.”
In his judgment, Coleman dismissed Fernandez’s evidence that the competition had changed to adopt the characteristics of rugby league tackling. Fernandez gave evidence on Tuesday that ex-NRL player Sandor Earl had been hired to bring the “professionalism of rugby league” to the RNC rule book.
But Coleman said videos of previous RNC events shown in court “only serve to confirm that what occurs in RNC is not tackling”.
“The object of the exercise was plainly to collide as forcefully as possible with the opponent,” he said, adding, “that the runner must carry a ball and maintain ball security does not assist the plaintiff’s argument”.
Despite the court’s decision, tickets for Saturday’s event were still on sale on Thursday afternoon, with the most expensive priced at $999. Previous Run Nation Championships have attracted NRL stars as spectators, including Cody Walker and Latrell Mitchell.
Coleman was not concerned with financial losses RNC would incur by way of cancelling Saturday’s event.
“There may be commercial consequences for Run Nation and its backers because of this decision. There may also be inconvenience to members of the public who have purchased tickets to attend the event,” he wrote.
“Neither of those consequences are relevant to the proper construction of the act and the decision I have made.”
From our partners
About the Author
