Case Number:

ON/1683/19

William Tilleke #18, Widnes

Competition:

Academy

Match:

Wakefield v Widnes

Match Date:

2019-09-07

Incident:

Unacceptable language in the 55th minute (Haywood Scriven)

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Rule – 15.1(f)
Detail – Use of Unacceptable Language
Grade – F

Fine:

£25

Sanctions:

8+ or period suspension

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Guilty, but challenging the grading

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 55th minute of the above Match. In the Panel’s opinion, you used offensive and obscene language based on sexual preference towards an opponent (Haywood Scriven). 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 sexual preference). In accordance with the On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the normal suspension range for such offence is 8 plus matches.

In response to the mention of the Hardaker comparison Miss Fairbank (RFL Compliance Manager) told the Tribunal that on that occasion the comment was not made in a threatening manner. It had also happened several years ago and since then the stance on this kind of behaviour had hardened. The RFL now has a zero-tolerance approach.

With regards to the player thinking the term used meant “soft” it was suggested he could have used that phrase instead.

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

Player in attendance alongside Head of Youth Ryan O’Brien. Player pleads Guilty to the charge but challenges the grading.

Mr O’Brien told the Tribunal that they were not here to brush over the incident and confirmed that they accepted the charge. He explained that both the player and club find this kind of conduct unacceptable, however, in this instance they feel an 8-game suspension would be too long a ban.

The player admitted he had no idea of the connotations involved, indeed he actually thought it the phrase used meant he was calling someone “soft” rather than any homophobic.

By his nature he is an aggressive player and can sometimes cross the line whilst on the field, however, he is certainly not homophobic. In this instance he had responded to an opponent in what had been an ill-disciplined game that had already seen a teammate stretchered off the field following a piece of foul play.

Mr O’Brien then told the Tribunal he thought a previous case (Hardaker, 5 matches) which occurred five years seemed like a more suitable outcome.

He added the player had one year remaining on his contract and in this time he would be looking to earn an extension whilst playing next year. Should an 8-match suspension be imposed it would mean the player could miss almost half a season after what had been an error of judgement made in a split second.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Reasons for Decision:

After listening to the submissions from both sides the Tribunal have decided that the grading at Grade F is indeed correct.

The are aware that the game had been an ill-disciplined contest but that this kind of homophobic abuse should not take place.

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 of Language
• Charged under verbal abuse based on sexual preference
• Referee dismissed a teammate in the 55th minute
• Footage demonstrates the player saying something and displaying aggressive body language
• Language reported
• Referee reacts immediately following the actions of the teammate – who it was believed made the comment
• Graded at Grade F due to:
- RFL operate a zero-tolerance on unacceptable language based on sexual preference
- As a sport we have a duty to ensure we are inclusive to all participants
- Not acceptable as a form of “sledging”
- Use of the word is an offensive term, which is classed as homophobic
- Body language indicates a level of aggression

Summary of Player's submissions on the appropriate sanction:

The player has plead Guilty to the charge and has expressed genuine remorse for his actions. Since the incident he has sent a letter of apology to his opponent and taking responsibility for his actions.

The player has also voluntarily made a donation to a charity.

Aggravating Factors:

25/07/2019 – Use of Knees (Grade B, 1 match)

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal have talked about the penalty that they feel should be imposed for this incident.

They are aware of the unusual nature that the charge has come about as it was originally a teammate who had been charged with the offence. However, they are impressed that the player has been honest and admitted his guilt.

The Tribunal have bore in mind that there is a zero-tolerance stance from the RFL on this kind of charge, however, they feel that in this unusual instance they can take into account the remorse shown by the player, the actions he has since taken (sending of an apology letter, donation to charity) and his previous record.

Whilst not a precedent, the Tribunal feel the charge should remain at Grade F but be the suspension should be reduced to 6 matches, plus a fine of £25.

Suspension:

6 matches