Case Number:

ON/101/21

Zane Tetevano #13, Leeds

Competition:

Challenge Cup

Match:

St Helens v Leeds

Match Date:

2021-04-10

Incident:

Late hit on passer in the 45th minute

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Law 15.1 (a)
Strikes – with hand, arm or shoulder - reckless
Grade D

Fine:

£500

Sanctions:

3-5

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Guilty, but challenging grading

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

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 12th April, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(a) during the above Match.

The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 45th minute of the above Match. You were dismissed following the incident. In the Panel’s opinion, you struck your opponent your opponent in the head area with your shoulder/upper arm after he had released the ball. The Panel believed that your actions were unnecessary, had the potential to cause your opponent an injury and were against the true spirit of the game and constitute Misconduct.

In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade D offence (Strikes – with hand, arm or shoulder - Reckless) In accordance with the On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the normal suspension range for such offence is 3-5 matches.

• MRP were concerned at the manner in which Mr Tetevano makes contact with his opponent.
• Player was dismissed in the 45th minute.
• Mr Fages takes the ball to the line and releases the ball and is in a vulnerable position
• As Mr Fages is facing away the player makes contact in a forceful manner
• Player is late in making contact
• There is no attempt to wrap the arms around and make a legitimate tackle
• There is clear contact with the head of the opponent. The MRP submit this is direct contact from the players shoulder/upper arm
• Referee confirms there contact with the head and has no hesitation and dismisses the player
• There is a high level of force in the contact demonstrated by the movement of Mr Fages head
• Players have a duty of care to their opponents
• Head injuries are a serious point of concern for all involved in contact sports and players have to be deterred from making contact with the heads of opponents. The RFL have sent communications in this regard at the beginning of the season and was raised at the Super League Head Coaches meeting
• MRP felt that there was no effort to grab, wrap or tackle Mr Fages and as such categorised this as a Grade D reckless strike.

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

Player in attendance alongside Head Coach Richard Agar, Director of Rugby Kevin Sinfield and Legal Rep Nils O’Donoghue. Player pleads guilty to the charge but challenges the grading. The club believe a Grade A or B would be appropriate.

NO led the club’s submissions by asking questions to the three club personnel.

KT talked the panel through the incident. He explained he was trying to put pressure on to the opponent with good line speed with his head to the side. Contact was to the chest, there was no follow through, he attempted to grab he was simply trying to do his job. He did not see the opponent release the ball. It was a genuine attempt to make a tackle that was perhaps mistimed. He could not reduce his approach speed and could not change how the tackle ended. He informed the panel that he had apologised to his opponent after the game and was also aware that his sending off had been costly to his team.

RA explained that the players practice that play every week. He told the panel that having reviewed the incident on the club’s software that the player would have had 0.20 seconds to pull out of the tackle. He added that the player had made this kind of tackle well previously and that there was a significant difference in size between the player and his opponent.

KS addressed the hearing and explained that the dismissal of the player had been very costly. The club was at the forefront of head injury research and that the player has shown genuine remorse for his actions and was very upset. He was distressed and felt that he had let his team mates down.

The incident happened with the scores close in a toughly contested game. The dismissal put his club at a very significant disadvantage and proved ultimately proved very costly. The players are coached to press the ball players on the opposition and that the player in this instance had tried to tackle but got it slightly wrong. There was no head contact, the opponent suffered no concussion, and he was able to continue to play the remainder of the game.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Aggravating Factors:

2017 – High Tackle (1 match suspension)

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal thank both sides for their submissions. Having watched the footage they are of the opinion that the opponent had realised the ball before contact and that contact was late. They also feel the player carried on with the movement and did not try and wrap the opponent up.

Contact was made to the head of the opponent from the shoulder and the player showed no signs of slowing down to avoid this kind of contact. They feel this was a reckless strike which was delivered with considerable force on a vulnerable opponent.

The Tribunal feel that the grading is correct at Grade D. They have taken into account the players previous record and also note that he has shown remorse for his actions and has admitted his guilt. They therefore feel a 4 match suspension should be ordered, along with a fine of £500.

Suspension:

4 matches