Case Number:

ON/210/24

Liam Sutcliffe #4, Hull FC

Competition:

Super League

Match:

Warrington Wolves v Hull FC

Match Date:

2024-02-23

Incident:

Contact with the Match Official

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Law 15.1 (i)

Deliberate or reckless physical contact with a match official (e.g. placing hand on arm to attract attention)

Grade D

Fine:

£250

Sanctions:

2 Match Penalty Notice & £250

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Guilty but challenging the grading

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

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 26th February 2024, 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 41 08 footage time of the above match. In the Panel’s opinion you have made physical contact with the referee in a reckless manner. In the Panel’s opinion they believed your actions to be misconduct and against the spirit of the game.

In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade D offence – Deliberate or reckless physical contact with a match official (e.g. placing hand on arm to attract attention).

The normal suspension range for such offence is from 2 to a 3 match Penalty Notice plus a fine.

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

• Mr Sutcliffe contacts the referee which knocks the referee to the ground.

• The player can be seen on the wide angle of the match footage to chased back 30 to 40m when a break is made downfield.

• For approx. 10 metres the Match Review Panel would submit that the player is practically running parallel to the referee.

• It is then that the player steps into the back of the referee and knocks him to the ground. The Match Review Panel submit that there is nothing wrong with the referee’s position and that the referee is in full view of the player or should be given his position.

• The Match Review Panel submit that the player was never in contention to stop the try or tackle any opposition player.

• The Match Review Panel note that the player puts his arm out towards the referee when there is contact but there is no acknowledgement thereafter from the player towards the referee.

• It is the view of the Match Review Panel that any type of contact given the situation was completely avoidable and unnecessary.

• The On Field Sentencing Guidelines underlying principles state that the disciplinary system must support and protect Match Officials.

• The Match Review Panel deemed this to be reckless contact with a Match Official and that the appropriate grading in this instance is a Grade D.

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

yer in attendance alongside James Clark (CEO). Player pleads Guilty but challenges the grading.

The attack is in broken play. In the left picture, MG and LS are both in full stride chasing the play. There is no reason at this stage for LS to assume that:

a) the referee will slow down his running
b) the referee will move slightly to the right and across LS path
c) that he still can’t get past and around the referee if required. Clearly both the match official and player are focused firmly on matters to the left hand side and where Warrington are likely to attack

At the point in which the Warrington player looks set to release the pass to the inside men, (which is what would be reasonably anticipated in this position) LS acknowledges that there is a defensive threat and therefore increases his speed.

into a full stride, towards the area where understandably he anticipates the attacking players will go.

LS (blue line) has not waivered from his starting position, he is running a line consistently from where he started to where he has identified the potential attacking threat area (marked in yellow). He has not changed course at any point to deliberate “aim” at the referee - he continues to track a course that is reasonable for him to do so.

It is fair that LS could have assumed MS would continue on the same path and same speed, rather than slowing and coming across him.

These stills highlight the stride pattern/body language of MG how he has gone from full speed to slowing in front of LS.

LS has not anticipated him slowing as he is still focused on running high speed to try and intercept a potential Warrington attack. LS has not veered from his line towards the referee, but the referee starts to come across his path.

By the right picture, it clear shows MG stride pattern has reduced (as shown in the full video clip) as he enters the muddy area of the field. There is little time for LS to react to that change of speed, whilst also still looking across at the potential attacking threat.

Suddenly, MG is now moving slower and much closer to LS than he was anticipating.

It could be argued LS should anticipate a change in speed but any failure to do so would be argued as “careless” in the event, rather than a “reckless” act.

LS has an accidental collision with MG. He does not push him. His arms are down by his side. He only becomes aware of the presence of MG/and the speed he is moving at a split second before, having been solely focused on the attack unfolding on the left and the area he needs to get himself to, to try and shut it down.

There are no signs of a deliberate/reckless act. No physical movement to push the referee or attack with any limb movement.

It can be argued that LS should be more aware of his surroundings / proximity to the match official, which we accept could be deemed as “careless” – we accept it is clumsy. But there is no sign of a “reckless” act.

LS arms make contact after the initial collision. They are not the cause of the collision. Therefore, contact with the arm is after the initial event and is a spontaneous reaction. In this case we believe to be conciliatory/safe behaviours.

This shows LS attempting to take hold of MG in an attempt to prevent him falling.

The video clip shows the duration of the arm contact demonstrating it isn’t a push and is actually LS showing concern for MG and a duty of care to the official in an attempt to stop him falling.

LS still doing his best to hold up MG to prevent him falling, but ultimately MG is a smaller body and off balance by this point.

By the last picture LS visibly shifts his body weight from the direction he is running, to try and help keep the referee upright.

These actions are consistent with LS character, as reflected in his disciplinary record. He is not a reckless player.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal note that the club/player accept that contact was made between the player and Referee, and they note that the club feel this was careless rather reckless.

However, they feel that the player has the Referee in his sight and is in close proximity with him for several strides before contact is made. They can find no reason why contact should be made.

The Referee has not slowed down and the player could have avoided making contact with him. Match Officials should be protected.

The Tribunal agree that the grading of the charge is correct at Grade D. The player will therefore be suspended for two matches and fined £250 as outlined in his penalty notice.

Suspension:

2 matches