Case Number:

ON/914/25

Jamie Shaul #29, Goole

Competition:

League One

Match:

Workington Town v Goole Vikings

Match Date:

2025-05-25

Incident:

Punching

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Law 15.1 (a)

Punching– makes contact with the head of an opponent

Grade E

Fine:

£75

Sanctions:

4+

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Guilty

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

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 29th May 2025, 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 approx.01 17 58 footage time of the above match. In the Panel’s opinion you have punched your opponent in the head. The Panel believe your actions were serious 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 E offence – Punching– makes contact with the head of an opponent

The starting suspension range for such an offence is 36 points plus (6 matches plus).

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

• Mr Shaul was dismissed because of his actions.

• The referees report stated that, “As Goole were in attack the ball was taken forward by Goole’s Jamie Shaul, he was tackled high by a Workington player, as Shaul was about to get up he hit the Workington player with a clenched first to the head area, players came in, but no other punches were thrown. After the players had been separated, I called Shaul out with his captain and dismissed him from the field and restarted with a penalty to Goole for the original high shot.”

• The footage clearly shows Mr Shaul throwing swinging his arm towards the opponent’s head area.

• Grade E 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:

Player in attendance alongside James Clark. Player pleads guilty, however, this should be with regard to an alternative charge of striking and once which should fall into a lower Grade such as A to C.

JC felt that there were inconsistencies in the Referee’s dismissal report, such as the number of punches alleged to have been thrown. He also added that JS was not an ill-disciplined player and had been involved in a tackle which the club felt was an act of foul play.

JS denied throwing a punch, however, he did admit to reacting to what he felt was a high tackle. He acknowledged his reaction was forceful but denied that it involved punching the opponent.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal listened to all submissions from both sides. They highlighted the importance of the Referee’s testimony, describing him as an experienced and credible witness. He was clear and consistent in his account, which aligned with his report.

In the player’s favour the panel acknowledged his good previous record on the pitch and his decent character. However, they concluded that in this instance he overreacted during the incident, and the footage and Referee testimony support this conclusion.

In conclusion the panel feel that JS did punch the opponent. JS is therefore suspended for 6-matches and fined £75. 36 penalty points will be added to his record.

Suspension:

6 matches