Case Number:

ON/1022/21

John Bateman #13, Wigan

Competition:

Super League

Match:

Wigan v St Helens

Match Date:

2021-08-20

Incident:

Foul and abusive language in the 50th minute

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Law 15 1 (g)

Disputes Decision of a Referee

Grade A

Sanctions:

1 Match Penalty Notice

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Not Guilty

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

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 23rd August 2021, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(g) during the above Match.

The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 50th minute of the above Match. You were sin binned for the offence. In the Panel’s opinion disputed a decision of the referee by stating according to the referee, ‘you need to give your head a XXXXXXX shake’. The Panel believe that your actions were unnecessary and brought the game into disrepute.

In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade A offence (Disputes Decision of a Referee). The normal suspension range for such offence is a NFA - 1 Match Suspension.

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

Player in attendance alongside Adrian Lam (Head Coach) and John Winder (Assistant Coach). Player pleads Not Guilty to the charge.

JW addressed the panel and explained that the words were directed at an opponent and not at the Referee. He felt that footage showed that the Referee did not have a direct line of sight of the player and that the players eyes were fixed on the opponent to whom he was directing the comments.

JW also felt the reaction of the opponent following the sin-binning shows that the comments were directed at him. They are in agreement that comments were made but that were not directed at the Referee.

JB informed the panel that he respected all Match Officials and that he had a good relationship with them, including the Referee involved in this incident. He explained he went into the melee to question the decision that had been made and also stressed the comments made were directed towards the opponent and not the Referee. He made the comments to the opponent as he felt he was targeting a younger teammate. He admitted that he shouldn’t speak like that but was frustrated.

Decision:

Not Guilty

Reasons for Decision:

In accordance with the On Field sentencing guidelines the player challenged the decision of the match review panel on the grounds of guilt.

In addition to hearing submissions by Gavin Wild on behalf of the MRP we heard evidence from the Referee Chris Kendall.

He told the panel that after blowing for a penalty to St Helens there was a coming together of players. As he was separating the players he heard talking from both teams and at one point believes he said to John Bateman “John I don’t need that“.

Mr Kendall then told us that he was certain that John Bateman said “you need to give your head a XXXXXXX shake”. The Referee believed strongly that those words were directed at him. He confirmed to the panel that if he had any doubts he would not have sin-binned John Bateman. He confirmed that there was no doubt in his mind of the words which were said and that they were said towards him.

We then heard from the player who confirmed so far as the incident was concerned that he used the words “you need to sort your XXXXXXX head out“, but that this was not directed toward the Referee, it was directed towards an opposing player (Louie McCarthy-Scarsbrook).

For the club John Winder reviewed the footage with us and made submissions which interpreted the incident in accordance with how the player had explained the incident. It was explained that the player LMS was stood directly behind the Referee as John Bateman made a comment and that the footage demonstrated that it was not conclusive that there were any words spoken by John Bateman directed towards the Referee Mr Kendall.

The panel felt that Chris Kendall did strongly believe that the comments were directed at him. The panel had every sympathy with Mr Kendall who was dealing with a fracas involving a number of players – it can be seen that different things were happening all at once and he had previously spoken to John Bateman using the words “I don’t need that John“.

The panel felt the on viewing the footage it can be inferred that John Bateman said something to which LMS reacted by smiling and then laughing before the referee sin-binned John Bateman. It is the panel’s view that LMS was directly behind the Referee, and it is very easy to understand how the Referee took the comments as being aimed at himself. The Referee accepted that he had a side on view such that John Bateman was in his peripheral vision when hearing these words spoken.

As such the panel felt that the Compliance Manager who had the burden of establishing that the unfilled misconduct had occurred could not demonstrate to the appropriate standard of proof that John Bateman had breached law 15.1(g) in the match.

As such the panel found John Bateman Not Guilty.

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)