Case Number:

ON/069/20

Zachary Johnson #, Hunslet

Competition:

Warm Up Matches

Match:

Hunslet v Leeds

Match Date:

2020-01-31

Incident:

Dangerous Throw in the 79th minute (Hall)

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Rule – 15.1(d)
Detail – Other Dangerous Throw
Grade – E

Fine:

£75

Sanctions:

4-8

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Guilty, but challenging the grading

Summary of CM's submissions on the Charge / evidence:

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 6th February, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(d) during the above Match.

The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 79th minute of the above Match. In the Panel’s opinion during making a tackle you lifted your opponent (Hall) into a dangerous position. You were dismissed following this incident. The Panel believed that your actions were unnecessary and had the potential to cause your opponent injury.

In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade E offence (Uses a Dangerous Throw – Other Dangerous Throw). In accordance with the On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the normal suspension range for such offence is 4 - 8 matches.

Summary of Player's submissions on the Charge / evidence:

Player in attendance and also represented over the phone by Head Coach Gary Thornton. Player pleads guilty but challenges the grading.

Mr Thornton said he can’t deny that his player didn’t put his opponent in a dangerous position. He said that the player had just returned to the professional game and that was keen to make an impact in this pre-season game. He thought that the weight difference in the players could have played some part and insisted there was no intent to cause injury and that the player had shown remorse.

The player informed the panel that he was glad that no injury was caused. He insisted there was no malice and that the game has been played in good spirits. He felt that his opponent could have contributed to the position he was put in as he tucked his head in whilst continuing to drive forward. He also felt that the size difference between them had been a factor.

He added there was no harm intended and this was demonstrated when he displayed no aggression in the aftermath of the tackle. This was just his second game back in the professional ranks and he was wanting to make an impression. He has no previous history of this kind of incident and that he had simply tried to fall back whilst using the players own body weight. He also informed the panel he has been on the pitch for a 30 minute spell.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal feel that the grading of this charge is correct at Grade E. They are of the opinion that his was a very dangerous tackle and could have resulted in a very serious injury.

The player used a lifting motion and appears to lose balance meaning he has no control. These actions resulted in the opponent being placed in a dangerous position and one that he could not get out of.

They accept that there was no intent involved, however, the player had other options to complete the tackle safely. Unfortunately, in this instance the opponents head does end up hitting the ground.

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Summary of CM's submissions on the appropriate sanction:

• MRP were concerned at the manner in which Mr Johnson completes this tackle.
• Dismissed in the 79th minute.
• Mr Johnson grips the opponent over the shoulder in an unorthodox, headlock like grip
• Player uses opponents head/neck as a level and begins to lift
• Attacker taken into a dangerous position – opponent’s hips are above his head
• Player loses control of feet and continues to throw bodyweight over own body
• Opponent cannot brace for landing
• Attacker’s head makes contact with the ground
• Player does not release grip at any time
• Serious risk of injury, due to this dangerous action.
• Player conducts tackle alone
• MRP not suggestion this is an intentional or malicious act.
• This was extremely reckless and dangerous.
• Grade E due to:
- Unnecessary nature of the upwards lifting motion
- Attacker placed in very dangerous position
- Attacker’s head makes contact with the ground

Summary of Player's submissions on the appropriate sanction:

The player has no previous history of this kind of incident. He again expressed his remorse for the way that the tackle ended up.

Mr Thornton added that after a spell away from the professional game the player was perhaps over exuberant and in this instance got this wrong. He added that the player was desperate to prove himself.

Aggravating Factors:

25/03/19 – Strikes (2 matches)
03/09/19 – Strikes (4 matches)
04/12/19 – Strikes (6 matches)

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal thank the player and his coach for the contributions. They are of the opinion that the players record from the community game last year should not play a part in their decision as it operates at a different tariff.

However, they do feel that this was an extremely dangerous and serious incident and one that could well have caused a serious injury.

They therefore feel a 6-match suspension and £75 fine should be handed down.

Suspension:

6 matches