Case Detail
Case Number:
ON/015/22
Pauli Pauli #12, York
Competition:
Warm Up Matches
Match:
York v Castleford
Match Date:
2022-01-16
Incident:
Late hit on passer at 5 49
Decision:
Charge
Charge Detail:
Law 15.1 (i)
Dangerous Contact - A defending player makes contact with an opponent after the ball has been released by an opponent in a vulnerable position which causes flexion to the head, neck or spinal column on an attacking player, which poses an unacceptable risk of injury to that player.
Grade B
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 20th January 2022, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(i) during the above Match.
The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 5th minute of the above Match. In the Panel’s opinion you unnecessarily made contact with your opponent after they had released the ball. The Panel believed that your actions 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 B offence – Dangerous Contact - A defending player makes contact with an opponent after the ball has been released by an opponent in a vulnerable position which causes flexion to the head, neck or spinal column on an attacking player, which poses an unacceptable risk of injury to that player.
The normal suspension range for such offence is from 1 to 2 matches.
• Incident occurs in approximately the 5th minute
• Mr Pauli is the inside defender to his opponent
• Opponent Mr Richardson takes the ball on the 10m and takes a step forward
• Mr Pauli upon seeing Mr Richardson catching the ball sets off at pace towards his opponent leaving the defensive line
• Mr Pauli has an unobstructed view of the ball
• Mr Pauli makes contact with his opponent after the ball has been released
• There is significant flexion of the players head/neck area
• The player has time to ensure he does not make the forceful contact that he does with his opponent
• No adaptions are made in this regard
• Grade B due to:
- Contact is late
- Speed at which player approaches opponent leaves no time to moderate behaviour when contacting opponent
- Forceful contact shown by movement of opponents head
- Potential for serious injury.
- Clubs have been warned about contacts which may cause rotational concussion repeatedly in previous Head Coaches meetings throughout 2021 and at the first meeting in 2022
Summary of Player's submissions on the Charge / evidence:
PP in attendance alongside India Seaton (Legal Rep) and James Ford (Head Coach). PP enters a Not Guilty plea.
IS informs the panel PP is of big stature could not slow down and in the situation has just milliseconds to react before contact. The club felt that he performed a legal tackle in which the opponent braced himself for contact. The tackle was not high and PP used a legal technique. He could not pull out at such a late stage due to the momentum and at that stage the opponent still had the ball.
PP felt that the rules need explaining to the players. He was doing his job as his team defending near their own try line and was trying to stop the play. He felt he could not slow down and there was certainly no intent to cause any injury.
JF added that the club had arranged a visit from a Match Review Panel representative to explain issues such as this and that this only happened the previous day.
Decision:
Not Guilty
Reasons for Decision:
In reviewing the footage and taking into account the submissions made by both sides the Tribunal feel that the Compliance Manager has not proved to the requisite standard that the offence was made out.
The player is therefore found Not Guilty.
The Tribunal do not accept that the player had sufficient time to pull out of the tackle and also feel that it was a legitimate tackling technique. The player had wrapped his opponent cleanly which indicates to the Tribunal that he was genuinely making a tackle and appeared to release his opponent after initial contact was made at a time when he believed his opponent no longer had the ball. This was not unnecessary contact and the Tribunal do not accept he could have taken evasive action given the closeness of the player to his opponent at the time the ball was released.
The footage appears that within the space of the opponent taking one step, contact was made by the player (who was attempting a legitimate tackle) and during the same step made by the opponent the ball was released.