Case Number:

ON/1546/24

John Asiata #13, Leigh

Competition:

Super League

Match:

London Broncos v Leigh Leopards

Match Date:

2024-08-25

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 26th August 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 28 44 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 from the field of play.

• The referees report stated that “London are attacking around the half way line, as the London player passes the ball Asiata tackles him late to ground and causes head rock. We penalise and then send to the sin bin”.

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

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

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

• The Match Review Panel 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 their 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 Neil Jukes (CEO), Adrian Lam (Head Coach and Chris Chester (Director of Rugby). Player pleads guilty but challenges the grading.

NJ explained that he had spoken to Paul Cullen (MRP Chair) at length about the grading of the charge, and the club felt a more appropriate grading would have been Grade B.

The club accept the JA’s approach was fast, however, he was working hard to stop a line-break from a 2 v 2 situation, against an opponent who is a centre so a quicker player. They felt he was committed to the tackle and could not see that the opponent had realised the ball.

The club do not feel this is a Grade C charge. The opponent was not injured and did not leave the field. This would have been a legal tackle if the opponent had the ball. JA modifies his behaviours by wrapping the opponent, taking him to ground and then going over the top of him so as not to land on him. This was not a frivolous challenge.

JA then talked the panel through the tackle. He admitted that contact was late.

AL said that JA had a good previous history. He felt that if the opponent doesn’t dummy then JA performs a good tackle. JA was following the technique he was coached.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal have taken into account the submissions made by both sides and the statements made by the player and his club

They are of the opinion that the grading of the charge at Grade C is correct. Having watched the footage they feel that the player was not unsighted when the opponent passed the ball and this was a reckless act. Contact was avoidable and the opponent was fortunate that no injury occurred.

The Tribunal do not feel that the challenge was frivolous. Therefore, the 1-match suspension following the penalty notice remains in place and the club will lose their £500 bond lodged for bringing the challenge.

Suspension:

1 match