Case Number:

ON/1060/24

Moses Mbye #14, St Helens

Competition:

Super League

Match:

St Helens v Castleford Tigers

Match Date:

2024-07-05

Incident:

Late contact on passer

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 8th July 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 19 31 footage time of the above match. In the Panels opinion you have contacted your opponent after the ball has been released causing flexion to the head and neck area. 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 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 a fine to a 1-Match suspension.
• Match Review Panel reviewed an incident in the above match.

• It is misconduct as soon as a player has contacted an opponent who does not have the ball.

• In this case Mr Mbye, it is clear on the footage, has contacted the opponent Mr Miller after the ball has been released causing flexion to the head and neck of the opponent.

• The MRP apply the guidance note for late contacts on passers and kickers in this instance.

• The MRP opinion is that the following:

- Defending player approaches the tackle in an uncontrolled manner – e.g., enters the tackle at speed
- The defending player fails to moderate his behaviour
- The nature and type of the contact is unnecessary and/or avoidable
- Considerable flexion of head, neck or spinal column to opponent

• Therefore, the MRP are of the opinion that this is a reckless contact which carries a Grade ranging from B to D.

• Assessing all those factors present within this incident, the Match Review Panel are of the opinion that this necessitated a Grade B charge.

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

Player in attendance alongside Mike Rush (CEO) and Paul Wellens (Head Coach). Player pleads Not Guilty.

MR talked the panel through the tackle. He explained the MM was trying to apply “inside pressure” in the defensive line.

MM could not see the ball and it is not possible to see the ball in every tackle. The opponent plays sideways and shows poor technique as he can’t pass off his inside foot.

MM is not excessively late and makes contact with the opponent just 0.28’s of a second after the ball has gone. His teammate to his right de-accelerates towards the attacking line and MM does not come out of the line too quickly.

The alleged flexion to the opponent’s neck cannot be proved via the footage. The TV gantry is approximately 75 metres away and the footage in grainy.

The opponent gets up and is involved in the next play. There is no re-action from any of the players.

PW then talked through the incident. He felt as MM can’t see the ball, he has to assume the opponent has it. He encourages his players to do things at speed and that players can tackle at speed and still be in control.

MM wraps his opponent and also takes him to ground. He felt that the MRP are not applying the standards that they told the club at a previous meeting. MM has performed a “gold standard” tackle and has shown a duty of care to his opponent.

MR added that the ball was not even half-way to the opponent’s teammate after contact had been made. MM is in control and there is no flexion caused to the opponent.

MM added that he felt he was in control in everything he did. He wrapped his arms on contact and went to ground with the opponent, with his body hitting the ground first.

Decision:

Guilty

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal have listened to the submissions from both sides and have watched footage of the incident several times.

They are in agreement with the MRP that the player makes contact with an opponent who was in a vulnerable position. The also feel it is correct that there is flexion to the neck or spinal column of the attacking player.

The player came at speed from the line. It was forceful contact.

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Reasons for Decision:

The Compliance Manager did not wish to make any submissions on whether the challenge to the penalty notice was unreasonable.

The Tribunal therefore rule that the Grade B charge and 1-match suspension outlined in the penalty notice remains in place. The club will also lose the £500 bond which was required to bring the challenge.

Suspension:

1 match