Case Detail
Case Number:
ON/1210/23
Rob Butler #33, London Broncos
Competition:
Championship
Match:
Swinton v London
Match Date:
2023-07-16
Incident:
Biting at 01:20:40 SharePoint
Decision:
Charge
Charge Detail:
15.1(i) Other Contrary Behaviour
Sanctions:
6+
Decision On Charge
Player plea:
Not Guilty
Summary of CM's submissions on the Charge / evidence:
Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 24th July 2023, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(i) during the above match.
The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred at 01 20 40 footage time of the above match. In the Panel’s opinion you have bitten your opponent. The Panel believe your actions were unnecessary, had the potential for injury and are against the true spirit of the game.
In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade F offence – Biting.
The normal suspension range for such offence is 6 matches plus.
• The Panel reviewed an incident which was placed On Report.
• During a tackle, Mr Butler is on the ground having been tackled by Mr Eaves and another Swinton player.
• Mr Eaves then lifts his arm up and looks towards the referee and is holding his finger out towards the referee for a period of time.
• At the next stoppage Mr Eaves confronts the referee and there is seemingly a conversation between both Mr Eaves and Mr Butler when this is occurring.
• The referee’s and touch judges report state the following;
At 1:20:40 (Sharepoint time) into the game, following a Swinton tackle on London’s Rob Butler, Swinton’s Josh Eaves exclaimed that he had been bitten. I told him on the run that I would proceed with the allegation at the next stoppage in play. At 1:22:30 (Sharepoint time) during the stoppage in play, I asked Eaves if he wanted to go on with the allegation, which he replied yes. I called over Eaves with his captain Rhodri Lloyd, as well as London captain Will Lovell and near touch judge Tara Jones. I felt at the time it would diffuse the situation by not calling over the London player in question Rob Butler. I inspected Eaves’ right middle finger, which had quite a bit of blood on it and a bit of bruising. I didn’t notice any visible teeth marks, but I noticed one large in the skin where the blood was coming from. I then instructed Tara to inspect the finger, before placing the incident on report.
At approximately 1:22:30 during the game Matt (referee) stopped the game and called me onto the field as a witness to see the mark/injury on Josh Eaves finger. Josh Eaves claimed that he wanted to make an allegation of biting against Rob Butler which had supposedly happened a couple of minutes previous at approximately 1:20:40. I could see that there was an injury to Josh Eaves right middle finger including a puncture wound with quite a bit of blood around the area. There was also a small dint and little bruising in the area but no full clear line of teeth marks.
• The Match Review Panel are satisfied that this was deliberate act committed by Mr Butler.
• The footage does not show anything with regards to the incident other than Mr Eaves reaction to what he perceives to have taken place.
• Mr Eaves is clearly upset and angered by the incident that he raises to the referee when there is a stoppage that he wishes to report the matter.
• This offence starts at Grade F. This is a serious case of misconduct and Mr Butler has sought to seek an advantage by showing a complete disregard for the opponent’s welfare and the negative and derogatory manner in he has acted – contrary to the true spirit of the game with such actions having no place on the Rugby League field of play.
Summary of Player's submissions on the Charge / evidence:
Player in attendance alongside Mike Eccles (Head Coach). Player pleads Not Guilty.
Josh Eaves (JE) joined the hearing to give evidence and was cross examined by the Compliance Manager and was available to be questioned by both the Tribunal members, charged player and club.
RB talked through the incident and said the JE’s fingers did end up in his mouth as the tackle was being completed. He had no idea whether this was intentional or not.
He explained he was fighting to get up to play the ball and there was no way he would intentionally bite someone. He did not play the game that way. He felt there was nothing he could of done differently and again confirmed there was no intention to bite. He confirmed he did not wear a gum shield when questioned by a side member.
Decision:
Not Guilty
Reasons for Decision:
The starting point for the decision of the Tribunal was the burden and standard of proof placed upon the compliance manager for the RFL.
For the avoidance of doubt the burden and standard are set out below.
The Compliance Manager shall have the burden of establishing that on-field misconduct has occurred.
The standard of proof shall be whether the Compliance Manager established the on-field misconduct has occurred to the reasonable satisfaction of the Tribunal, with due regards given to the seriousness of the allegation which is being made.
This standard of proof in all cases is greater than the mere balance of probability but less than proof beyond a reasonable.
The Tribunal felt that this was a serious allegation.
Having heard evidence from Josh Eaves that he believed he was bitten and evidence from the player that essentially any injury was caused by way of accident. It was felt that the injury viewed and reported by both the Referee and the Touch Judge could equally apply to both explanations. There were no photographs of the injury for the Tribunal to review, the footage was not probative either way. No visible teeth marks were seen by either Touch Judge or Referee.
In all of the circumstances the Tribunal found the player Not Guilty on the basis that the evidence did not reach the required standard of proof.