Case Number:

ON/168/22

Dylan Napa #22, Catalans

Competition:

Super League

Match:

St Helens v Catalans

Match Date:

2022-02-10

Incident:

Shoulder charge at 1 37 46

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Law 15.1 (a)

Strikes – Strikes with hand, arm or shoulder – Reckless

Grade D

Fine:

£500

Sanctions:

3-5

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Guilty

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

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 14th February 2022, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(a) during the above Match.

The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 72nd minute of the above Match. You were sent off following the incident. In the Panel’s opinion, you struck your opponent in the head area with your shoulder/upper arm. The Panel believed that your actions were unnecessary, had the potential to cause your opponent an injury and were 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 D offence – Strikes – Strikes with hand, arm or shoulder - reckless.

The normal suspension range for such offence is from 3 to 5 matches.

• MRP were concerned at the manner in which Mr Napa makes contact with his opponent.
• Player was dismissed in the 71st minute.
• Mr Percival carries the ball first man off a ruck
• Mr Napa comes at speed across 2 other team mates in the defensive line
• There is no attempt to wrap the arms around and make a legitimate tackle
• There is clear contact with the head of the opponent. The MRP submit this is direct contact from the player’s shoulder/upper arm
• Referee confirms there is contact with the head and has no hesitation and dismisses the player
• There is a high level of force in the contact demonstrated by the movement of Mr Percival head
• Players have a duty of care to their opponents
• Head injuries are a serious point of concern for all involved in contact sports and players have to be deterred from making contact with the heads of opponents. The RFL have sent communications in this regard both at the start of the 2021 season and now again for the 2022 season
• MRP felt that there was no effort to grab, wrap or tackle Mr Percival and as such categorised this as a Grade D reckless strike.

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

DN in attendance alongside Steve McNamara (Head Coach) and Alex Chan (Sporting Director). Player pleads Not Guilty to Law 15.1(a) but does plead Guilty to 15.1(b).

AC explained that whilst they plead Not Guilty to the original charge (Striking) they do plead Guilty to committing a reckless tackle.

DN thanked the panel for been given the opportunity to speak. He understood the changes to the process and the need to make the game safe. It was near the end of an intense game and he talked the panel through the tackle. He felt the opponent stepped and that initial contact was made on the ball. He agreed his was reckless in his approach but he had no intention to cause injury and that was never any direct contact to the head. If contact had been made to the head the incident would have been a lot worse.

SM explained that he felt the tackle needed punishing but that if any direct head contact had been made it would have been far worse. The opponent was straight back up. They feel that the player in this instance is guilty of a Reckless High Tackle.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Aggravating Factors:

16/08/20 – Dangerous Contact – Head/Neck
28/07/19 – Dangerous Contact – Other
25/08/18 – Dangerous Contact – Head/Neck
12/05/18 – Dangerous Contact – Other
12/05/18 – High Tackle – High Tackle – Careless

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal felt that this was not a reckless tackle – Rule 15.1 (b) – as was submitted by the player and his representatives. The player was charged with misconduct for breach of 15.1 (a) as the Match Review Panel believe this was a Strike with hand, arm or shoulder in a reckless manner.

On consideration of the representations and footage the Tribunal felt that the player had promoted his shoulder and that there was no wrap into the tackle. The Tribunal were not satisfied that there was enough evidence of a wrap to call it a legitimate attempt at a tackle, for example there was no wrap with both arms.

The Tribunal felt that this was correctly graded at Grade D and feel a four-match suspension and £500 fine should be imposed.

Suspension:

4 matches