Case Detail
Case Number:
ON/1650/19
Stanislas Robin #7, Toulouse
Competition:
Championship
Match:
Featherstone v Toulouse
Match Date:
2019-09-07
Incident:
Spitting in the 61st minute (Walters)
Decision:
Charge
Charge Detail:
Rule – 15.1(i)
Detail – Spitting
Grade – E
Sanctions:
4-8
Decision On Charge
Player plea:
Not Guilty
Summary of CM's submissions on the Charge / evidence:
Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 12th September, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(i) during the above Match.
The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 61st minute of the above Match. In the Panel’s opinion, evidence presented suggests you spat at your opponent (Walters). The Panel believed that your actions were unnecessary and are against the true spirit of the game and constitute Misconduct.
In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade E offence (Behaves in way contrary to the true spirit of the game – spitting) In accordance with the On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the normal suspension range for such offence is 4 - 8 matches.
Summary of Player's submissions on the Charge / evidence:
Hearing conducted via over the phone with player, Head Coach Sylvain Houles, CEO Cedric Garcia and Legal Rep. Player pleads Not Guilty.
Player explains he was tackled by opponent and both players went to the ground. Player indicates he was frustrated and reacted verbally swearing in French at the opponent in a forceful way and as he did so some saliva came out of his mouth.
It was not intentional and it did not touch the opponent who does not wipe himself or show anything towards the official. The referee is well positioned and did not react to any spitting incident or indicate in his report that he witnessed any spitting.
There was no movement of the head towards the opponent as if he was deliberately spitting. The opponents statements indicates they saw saliva leaving the players mouth but could not interpret it as an intentional spit at an opponent.
Decision:
Not Guilty
Reasons for Decision:
The Tribunal have carefully and anxiously listened to and read the statements submitted by the player, his club and his teammates and those of the opposition players in this matter.
The footage of the incident has been played several times. Having taken all these into consideration this Tribunal can fully understand why the MRP decided there was a case to answer. The statements from the opponent Walters and his teammates indicate they saw saliva come from the opponent towards their teammate.
The player himself indicates he was frustrated with the opponent and swore at him in French which may have resulted in saliva coming from his mouth towards the opponent. The match official is close to the incident and does not indicate in his report he witnessed an act of spitting.
This Tribunal have to be comfortably satisfied that this was a deliberate act of spitting and directed at the opponent. On the evidence presented they cannot be satisfied this was an incident of deliberate spitting and therefore find the player Not Guilty.