Case Detail
Case Number:
ON/1678/19
James Cunningham #7, London
Competition:
Super League
Match:
Hull KR v London
Match Date:
2019-09-06
Incident:
Unacceptable language in the 73rd minute (Masoe)
Decision:
Charge
Charge Detail:
Rule – 15.1(f)
Detail – Use of Unacceptable Language
Grade – F
Sanctions:
8+ or period suspension
Decision On Charge
Player plea:
Not Guilty
Summary of CM's submissions on the Charge / evidence:
Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 16th September, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(f) during the above Match.
The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 73rd minute of the above Match. In the Panel’s opinion, you used offensive and obscene language based on ethnic origin towards an opponent (Masoe). The Panel believed that your actions were unnecessary and constitute Misconduct.
In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade F offence (Uses offensive or obscene language – Uses unacceptable language based on ethnic origin). In accordance with the On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the normal suspension range for such offence is 8 plus matches.
Miss Fairbank (RFL Compliance Manager) asked questions to two players who had been interviewed as part of the investigation. She explained one of the players was adamant he had heard the comment and that there was no other re-action from any other players apart from the two mentioned above.
Summary of Player's submissions on the Charge / evidence:
Player in attendance alongside his Head Coach Danny Ward. Player pleads Not Guilty to the charge.
Mr Ward told the Tribunal that both he and the club had a zero-tolerance approach to this kind of language and that his team was one that was multi-cultural, a side that the player had been part of for several years.
The player explained to the panel that he was not racist, and it was upsetting that his name had appeared in the national media having been charged with this offence.
He informed the Tribunal that he didn’t even know the what the term he had been accused of saying even meant.
In response to the submissions given over the phone from two players involved in the investigation Mr Ward queried whether one of the players in question was indeed 5 metres away, whilst after looking at the footage in appeared to be more like 25 metres.
Decision:
Not Guilty
Reasons for Decision:
The Tribunal have watched the footage and listened to the submissions made from both sides, as well as the contributions from the players involved in the investigation.
They are aware that this is an extremely serious allegation and it was completely right that it was brought in front of a Tribunal.
The Tribunal are concerned that there were some discrepancies in the verbal submissions given by the players over the phone compared to the ones contained in the investigators report.
In coming to a decision, the Tribunal have got to comfortably satisfied with the standard of proof that is provided and in this instance that cannot be the case.
They therefore find that the player is Not Guilty of the charge brought against him.
Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)
Summary of CM's submissions on the appropriate sanction:
• Player charged under Rule 15.1 (f) Verbal abuse based on race, colour, religion, gender, sexual preference, disability, national or ethnic origin or any other form of Unacceptable Behaviour or Language
• Charged under Verbal abuse based on national or ethnic origin
• Incident placed on Report by the Referee in the 74th minute
• The MRP referred the matter to a Compliance Investigator and reviewed the file after investigation
• Graded F due to:
- RFL operate a zero-tolerance on Unacceptable Language based on an individual’s national or ethnic origin
- As a sport we have a duty to ensure we are inclusive to all participants
- Not acceptable as a form of “sledgingâ€
- Use of the word is an offensive term which is classed as discriminatory due to an individual’s national or ethnic origin