Malta waterpolo's regulatory body on Monday stood by its decision to ban a player for 12 matches for biting other players, and argued that court action to overturn the ban was premature since other remedies could have been sought within the association's structures itself.

San Giljan waterpolo player Ben Plumpton was disciplined by the disciplinary commissioner of the Aquatic Sports Association for biting two Sliema players during a match. An initial four-match ban was tripped on appeal.

Plumpton went to court last week, seeking a warrant to stop the ban, arguing that the ASA's appeals board acted beyond its powers.

But the ASA rebutted that Plumpton had other remedies at his disposal which he failed to exhaust before seeking an injunction in court. The civil courts, therefore, were not the proper forum to challenge and annul the decision of ASA’s Board of Appeal and the action was premature 

The ASA’s statute said that the association’s council had the power “to remit or shorten” any sentence handed down by its internal organs “upon due cause being shown.” 

Plumpton, therefore, could have simply asked his club to file a motion before the council asking for the revocation or reduction of the penalty. However, Plumpton and his club did nothing of the sort.  

Moreover, the ASA said, the board’s appeal decision was in line with the association’s regulations and the association believed that such misbehaviour deserved “harsh sanctioning” as it harmed the reputation of the sport.

The board of appeal members as well as the association’s secretary general denied that the board had acted beyond its remit, pointing out that St Julian’s club had appealed the commissioner’s decision on Plumpton’s behalf “in its entirety.”   

Madam Justice Josette Demicoli is expected to decree on the matter in chambers.

Lawyers Charles Mercieca, Carlos Bugeja and Ismael Vella assisted Plumpton. Lawyer Herman Mula assisted the ASA.