Every piece must satisfy at least one. We prefer two.

Part 1

Who we are

Our purpose

The Tryline exists to be the positive, constructive voice of rugby in Hong Kong — and, in time, across Asia.

We celebrate what is good about our game: the players, parents, coaches, volunteers, referees and administrators who show up every weekend and keep rugby alive in a city that doesn't always notice. We profile the mini rugby kid in Tin Shui Wai as readily as the Hong Kong China cap at Kai Tak. We cover the game bilingually, because Hong Kong rugby is bilingual.

We also speak plainly when we see things that could be better. But we do so the way a good teammate gives feedback in the changing room — privately first where possible, publicly when necessary, always with a solution, and never to wound.

Our stance — the rule of three

Every piece we publish must satisfy at least one of these. We prefer two.

1. Celebrate

   Something worth celebrating that would otherwise go unnoticed. The mini rugby kid in Tin Shui Wai as readily as the Hong Kong China cap at Kai Tak.

2. Explain

   Something about the game, the community, or the ecosystem that helps a reader understand it better. Bilingually, where it matters.

3. Improve

   Pair a clearly-described problem with a clearly-proposed solution. Problem · Evidence · Cost · Proposal — every time, or it doesn't run.

If a piece does none of these three, it does not run. Controversy without constructive purpose is not our business.

Our readers

We write for the whole Hong Kong rugby ecosystem — mini rugby parents, schoolkids, club players at every level, coaches, referees, volunteers, administrators, alumni, and fans. We assume they love the game. We do not write for outrage-seekers.

Our language

We publish in English and Cantonese. Cantonese is not a translation afterthought — it is a parallel voice, culturally adapted, because over half of Hong Kong's rugby players are ethnically Chinese and deserve original content in their own language.

Part 2

The positive-constructive stance, in practice

The "positive voice" commitment is not a constraint on honesty. It is a method for being honest usefully.

When we describe a problem, we describe a fix

Every critical piece follows the Problem → Evidence → Cost → Proposal structure:

• Problem. What, specifically, is wrong? Not a vibe — a thing.
• Evidence. How do we know? What data, observation, or sourcing supports it?
• Cost. Who or what is being hurt by this being the way it is?
• Proposal. What should change, concretely? Who can make it change? What would "better" look like?

If we cannot complete all four, we do not publish the critique. We keep reporting, or we leave it alone.

We punch up, not down

• Critique of institutions, systems, policies, and those with power — on the record, with proposals.
• Individuals with significant power (officials, executives, senior coaches) may be named in critique when the issue is role-based — decisions they made in their role, not who they are.
• Volunteers, parent coaches, young players, referees, and grassroots participants are not critiqued by name. If a systemic issue touches them, we write about the system, not the person.

We never write critically about children

No named critique of any player under 18, ever. Profiles and celebrations of youth players are permitted only with parent/guardian consent and club awareness. Photos of youth players require the same.

Hot takes are not our product

We do not compete on speed, outrage, or screenshots. We are slow, thoughtful, and accurate. If a story is breaking, we wait until we can add something worth waiting for.

We are sceptical of our own positivity

Positive coverage can become PR. We protect against this by:

• Never accepting payment, gifts, or hospitality in exchange for specific coverage.
• Disclosing any commercial relationship with a subject prominently in-piece.
• Giving equal editorial space to smaller, less-connected parts of the community — women's rugby, schools in underserved districts, Cantonese-speaking voices, referees, volunteers — not just the clubs and figures who are easy to access.

The mirror test

Before publishing any piece that names a person, the editor asks one question: "If this person read this over my shoulder right now, would I stand by every line in front of them?"

If the answer is not an unhesitating yes, the piece is revised or shelved.

Part 3

Pieces involving people we know personally

Hong Kong rugby is small. The founder is an active participant — community coach, team manager, parent of players, part of the network. Almost every meaningful story touches someone in the founder's circle. This part governs how we handle that conflict so it never compromises the publication.

Default disclosure rule

Every piece that names or meaningfully concerns a person with a direct personal relationship to the founder must either:

1. Carry an explicit conflict disclosure in-piece (e.g. "The Tryline's editor coaches the youth team discussed here."), or
2. Be assigned to a contributor with no such relationship and published under their byline.

The choice is made case by case, guided by the matrix below.

The severity-and-proximity matrix

Core principle: the closer the relationship, the less critical we are willing to be under the founder's name. This is not cowardice — it is recognising that the reader cannot trust an author to be fair about someone the author sees every Sunday.

The recusal principle

For any piece concerning a person the founder has a close, ongoing personal relationship with, the founder recuses entirely, even from editing. It is either handed to a contributor, or it does not run.

The test: "If I were the subject's opposite number in a dispute, would I accept this author as a fair arbiter?" If no, recuse.

The "don't settle scores" rule

The single clearest red line: The Tryline is never used to address a personal grievance of the founder's, however dressed up.

Test before publishing any critical piece: "Would I still want to publish this if I had no personal connection to the subject — if I'd just read about them in yesterday's SCMP?" If the honest answer is no, the piece is personal, not editorial, and it is killed.

Right-of-reply

Any person named in a critical piece is contacted before publication with a summary of what is being said, and given a reasonable window — 24 hours minimum, 72 hours preferred for non-breaking stories — to respond. Their response, or declining to respond, is represented fairly in the piece.

Corrections

When we get something wrong, we correct it promptly and visibly at the top of the piece. We note what changed and when. We thank the person who flagged it, where appropriate. We never quietly edit and pretend.

Corrections are a feature, not a failure. A publication that never corrects is a publication that isn't paying attention.

Part 4

Commercial and political lines

Advertising

Advertising is sold at the section level (e.g., "Schools Coverage presented by X") and via display. Advertisers have zero input on editorial. Sponsorship of a section does not immunise the sponsor from honest coverage elsewhere. If a sponsor objects to critical coverage elsewhere on the site and threatens withdrawal, we lose the sponsor, not the coverage.

Governing-body relationship

We seek a productive, arm's-length relationship with Hong Kong China Rugby and other bodies. We amplify what they do well. We critique constructively when warranted. We do not become their communications arm, and we do not become their opposition. We are the community's paper, not theirs and not anyone's.

Political neutrality

Rugby in Hong Kong sits in a politically-sensitive jurisdiction. The Tryline covers rugby. We do not offer commentary on Hong Kong's political status, mainland relations, or national representation debates except where they directly and unavoidably intersect with on-field rugby matters. When we must address such matters, we do so neutrally, with sources, and without advocacy.

Part 5

How we work

Sourcing

• At least one named source, or two corroborating unnamed sources, for any contested claim.
• Anonymous sources used only when the source faces credible risk from being named, and only when their claim is corroborated.
• Records, statistics, and official statements are cited with links.

Photography

• Original photography preferred. Credited always.
• Third-party photos used only with permission or fair-use for editorial comment.
• Youth player photography only with club / parent awareness.

AI disclosure

AI tools are used in newsroom workflow — research assembly, first drafts, translation, social packaging, analytics. Every piece is edited by the human editor before publication. We do not publish AI-generated content unreviewed, and we do not pretend AI isn't part of the workflow. Any piece that is substantively AI-generated beyond first-draft assistance is labelled as such.

Reader letters and engagement

• Every reader email is read. We aim to reply to all within 72 hours in the first year.
• Letters to the editor are welcomed and published (with consent) when they add to the public conversation.
• Comment sections are moderated for substance. Personal attacks, racism, and bad-faith participation are removed without apology.

Part 6

Governance

• This charter is public. Readers, subjects, and sponsors can hold us to it.
• The charter is reviewed and, if needed, revised annually — with any changes logged and dated.
• Material changes to Parts 1, 2, or 3 are announced to subscribers.
• The founder holds final editorial authority but is bound by this document on the same terms as any contributor.

Signed into effect by the founder and editor of The Tryline.

"Support the ball carrier. Back up the runner. And when you see a gap — go for the line."