ON RUGBY: Tomorrow the third series of matches in the Six Nations Championship will take place. From an Irish perspective, the focus will, of course, be on the match at Lansdowne Road when Ireland play Scotland.

Wales will play Italy at the Millennium Stadium, and in Paris the match brings together the two countries with 100 per cent records, France and England. The country that wins that match will be favourites to win the Championship and complete the Grand Slam.

That encounter is one that has aroused tremendous interest in this great competition. It is the centre piece of the day. But what kind of publicity do we have prior to the match? Not as it should be: the focus on what will happen on the pitch and an attempt to weigh the merits of the respective teams. No, we have the unedifying controversy of what is happening off of it.

I am referring to the situation in relation to the England captain Martin Johnson. His disciplinary record is scarcely what one should expect from one who is captain of his country, and has twice been captain of the Lions. A role model, then, for the young. A man who should lead by precept and example.

We hear a lot of talk from rugby authorities that acts of indiscipline will not be tolerated and those who perpetrate them will pay the price. Quite right, too, that they should. But does this happen? Well, it depends on who is being judged and who is sitting in judgment.

A few weeks ago Johnson punched an opponent, Robbie Russell, in the face, and Russell required six stitches in the wound Johnson inflicted. The referee inexplicably gave Johnson a yellow card instead of the red which the offence warranted.

That was not deemed sufficient punishment, so Johnson was called before a disciplinary committee set up by the English Rugby Union (RFU) in Bristol. After a protracted hearing he is suspended for three weeks. Bearing in mind his disciplinary record, it was a lenient suspension.

Now, that disciplinary hearing did not take place until after England played Ireland at Twickenham, so Johnson was free to play in the match. No complaint on that score within the terms of the situation. The principle involved is another matter. But let us leave that rest for the moment.

Johnson is then suspended for three weeks, and what do we get? An appeal on the grounds that the suspension is illegal as the matter had already been dealt with by the issuing of a yellow card. Now the disciplinary hearing was called for by Johnson's parent union, the RFU. That is important.

The appeal hearing will not take place until next week, so Johnson is free to lead England against France tomorrow. That appeal is supported by Johnson's club, Leicester, by Premier Rugby Ltd and by the Professional Players' Association. The appeal is, in essence, based on the jurisdiction of the disciplinary committee that imposed the suspension. Obviously the RFU and Leicester disagree on the right of the RFU to have intervened.

Rugby being the physical contact game that it is, a player can, in the heat of the moment, throw a punch or commit some other act of aggression that may indeed be out of character. But a price must be paid for it and has been paid by many a player. What Johnson did was not out of character.

For let us look at Johnson's record. Remember his assault on the New Zealand scrumhalf Christian Cullen; remember his activity a few years ago against Wales. Then we had the five- week suspension imposed for the injury he inflicted on the Saracens' Duncan MacRea.

Leaving aside the legal technicalities of Johnson's appearance before the disciplinary committee, what he did - and bearing in mind the level of responsibility he carries - the RFU had to be seen to act even if it meant telling the England management to omit the player for least one international. Is there not a very important moral issue here, and what about the integrity of the game?

A FEW weeks ago another Leicester and England player, Austin Healey, got three weeks for kicking-tripping an opponent even though it was his second offence and had taken place within the stipulated period where the suspension should have exceeded three weeks. Was Healey contrite? No, not at all, he said it was trial by television.

Then we had the assault on Ronan O'Gara during the Lions tour by MacRea. The pathetic suspension handed down brought the game into disrepute.

A few weeks ago the Castres player, Ismaaella Lassissi, was found guilty of biting Peter Clohessy and given a suspension of a year by a European Rugby Cup (ERC) disciplinary committee. Lo and behold, within a matter of a week that suspension was overturned as the lawyers got to work and the message was "play away".

For those who care about rugby and its image - and that, I am sure, represents the vast majority of players, administrators and supporters - the feeling is one of disgust. When it comes to high-profile players, some administrators are motivated by expediency and not principle. Is it any wonder some of the decent and honourable members of the RFU are incensed by what has happened? It is shameful and damaging to rugby.

To revert to the Ireland v Scotland match tomorrow. Despite the disappointing nature of the display against England, this is a very big game for Ireland, the management and the players. The outcome will have a vital bearing on the trend of Ireland's season.

A win, and it is of the utmost importance that it is attained, should mean that Ireland will emerge from the championship on the credit side. No disrespect to Italy, but it is a reasonable expectation that Ireland will beat Italy in two weeks in Dublin. Should Ireland win tomorrow and beat Italy it will mean going to Paris on April 6th seeking four wins from the five matches: no bad return, and it would emulate 2001.