Case Number:

ON/004/24

Nathan Goodwin #1, Haresfinch

Competition:

Challenge Cup

Match:

Orrell St James v Haresfinch

Match Date:

2024-01-14

Incident:

Striking

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Law 15.1 (a)

Strikes with hand, arm, elbow, or shoulder – off the ball

Grade F

Sanctions:

6+

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Guilty

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

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 18th January 2024, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(a) during the above match.

The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred at 48 37 footage time of the above match. In the Panel’s opinion you have struck your opponent off the ball with your arm. Your opponent was not expecting this to happen and was in a vulnerable position. The Panel believe your actions were unnecessary and had the potential for serious injury.

In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade F offence – Strikes with hand, arm, elbow, or shoulder – off the ball.

The normal suspension range for such offence is 6 matches plus.

• The Match Review Panel reviewed an incident in the above match.

• Mr Sykes was sin binned following the incident.

• Following an incident where Mr Goodwin’s teammate is in receipt of an illegal challenge, Mr Goodwin runs into the incident and strikes his opponent with his forearm to the back of the head and neck.

• The opponent has his back to Mr Goodwin and is in a vulnerable position.

• Mr Goodwin has acted in a violent manner and his actions had the potential to cause injury.

• Grade F due to:
- Violent, unnecessary actions.
- Potential for injury. Area of concern for the game
- Violent act which brings the sport into disrepute and portrays the game in a negative light

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

The player was in attendance alongside Dom Gale (Secretary). Player pleads guilty.

NG admitted the incident looked bad, however, he entered the ruck area in the heat of the moment following what he felt was a bad tackle on a team mate. He ran in from full-back and was trying to get people out of the way as players from both sides came together.

He explained he had played for 25 years and had an exemplary record. He conceded he was stupid to react, however, it was a big game and tensions were high.

DG said he understood why DG had reacted the way he did. The tackle was the worst tackle he had eve seen and it was fortunate there was no injury caused. He added that a 6-game suspension would be too harsh.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal thank both sides for their submissions.

They feel that this was a “strike” rather than a push and was a re-action following a bad tackle on a teammate. However, players cannot “pile in” after something happens in a game that they feel is foul play.

The opponent does see the player coming in so takes some kind defensive action which lessens the impact; however, the player does run in at speed and makes contact with his arm/elbow to the head of the opponent. The outcome could have been a lot worse.

The Tribunal agree with the grading at Grade F. Taking everything into account the feel a suspension of 6 matches is appropriate.

Suspension:

6 matches