Case Number:

ON/1098/24

Josh Hardcastle #3, Featherstone

Competition:

Championship

Match:

Featherstone Rovers v Whitehaven

Match Date:

2024-07-07

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 C

Sanctions:

1 Match Penalty Notice

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Guilty but challenge the grading

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

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 11th 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 16 20 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. 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 C 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 1 to a 2-Match suspension.

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

• The player was temporarily dismissed following the incident.

• The referees report stated that, “Whitehaven was attacking from a scrum in the final 10m. As Jake Carter was taking the ball up Josh hits him late with force after the ball has gone. So, I sin binned him due to the high force.”

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

• 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 C charge.

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

Player in attendance alongside James Ford (Head Coach) and Martin Vickers (CEO). Player pleads guilty but challenges the grading.

JF explained that the player was defending from a scrum where he had to break early to take up a position to ensure that there were four defenders v four attackers.

Form his viewpoint the player was unable to see if the attacker had kept hold of the ball or passed it to a teammate. He had to make tackle in case the attacker still had the ball and if he had not the attacker would have had a free run to the line.

JF then asked what do the MRP suggest a defender does in this instance with a fraction of a second to make a decision?

MV added that there was a similar case last week in the game at Halifax which resulted in no suspension and the same should apply in this case.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal accept that initially the players intention might have been to close down the attacker from the scrum, however, what is clear is that he never tried to tackle him

He approached at speed and hit him squarely in the back with his shoulder, at which point the attacker had long released the ball and was not expecting contact.

The Compliance Manager was asked what the MRP would suggest that the player could do to mitigate this situation. He suggested to attempt a legitimate tackle as opposed to planting a shoulder in the opponents back. There was no attempt to wrap his arms.

The arm movement after contact was in the panels view simply falling on top of the player that he had knocked to the floor.

What we are all seeking to achieve is the game being played safely regardless of the intention of the player and what he is going to do and players must approach tackles with sufficient control that they do not make contact with a player after the ball has gone, and if they do not then they are likely to be charged with offences.

The Tribunal agree with the MRP that this is a Grade C offence given the forceful contact with the player, no legitimate attempt to tackle and the significant flexion of the head and neck.

As this was a challenge to a penalty notice the penalty will be in accordance with that set out on the penalty notice. The player is therefore suspended for 1-match.

Suspension:

1 match