Case Number:

ON/178/25

Joe Shorrocks #16, Salford

Competition:

Super League

Match:

Salford Red Devils v Leeds Rhinos

Match Date:

2025-02-22

Incident:

Head Contact

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Law 15.1 (b)

Head Contact

Grade D

Sanctions:

2 Match Penalty Notice & Fine

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Guilty but challenge the grading

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

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 24th February 2025, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(b) during the above match.

The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred at 40 32 match time of the above match. In the Panel’s opinion you have contacted your opponent in the head and neck. In the Panel’s opinion they believed your actions to be 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 D offence – Head Contact

The Penalty Points for such an offence is 15 Penalty Points. (12 Penalty Points for a Grade D and 3 Penalty Points as the opponent failed his HIA and did not return to the field of play as result of this act of misconduct).

In accordance with the On-Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Match Review Panel consider that this matter should be dealt with by way of a Penalty Notice. As such, the appropriate sanction is determined with reference to the number of Penalty Points you have accumulated in the previous 12 months.

Including the Penalty Points accrued for the above charge your total Penalty Points is 15. Accordingly, the Penalty Notice imposed on you is a 2-match suspension and a £500 Fine.

• Match Review Panel reviewed an incident in the above match.
• The match referee sin binned the player following the incident.
• The report stated that “Salford line. As Croft was going into contact, he rapidly lost height as Shorrocks made contact with the head. The contact was forceful and dangerous, however, there was a mitigating factor of the rapid and unexpected loss of height. In my opinion, the force of the impact on Croft was actually generated with Croft clashing heads with Ormondroyd who also required a HIA. Albeit Shorrocks reached the sin bin threshold for his initial contact, in my view it was not his contact which caused Croft to leave the field on the stretcher that was the secondary collision with Ormondroyd.”
• The MRP state that the footage clearly shows Mr Shorrocks making contact with his shoulder/upper arm to the head of his opponent Mr Croft.
• The incident led to the ball carrier leaving the field of play and not returning. Subsequent information confirms that the opponent failed his Head Injury Assessment.
• The Match Review Panel deemed this to be forceful and dangerous and that this was high level of force and danger. For a contact to the head with high level of force and danger, the entry grading is a Grade C charge.
• The Match Review Panel do not believe that there were any mitigating factors at play with regards this incident.

• The aggravating factors are:
- Tackler makes no definite attempt to change height to avoid the ball carrier’s head.
- The trajectory of the tackler’s shoulder/arm is always going towards the ball carrier’s head.
- Ball carrier fails HIA.

• The Match Review Panel believe that the aggravating factors are sufficient to move this to a Grade D charge.

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

Player in attendance alongside Marco Floreal (Legal Rep), Chris O’Connor (Player Welfare & 1st Team Manager) and Chris Irwin (CEO). Player pleads guilty but challenges the grading.

CO’C argued that the grading was incorrect and that the club believe that the collision which caused Brodie Croft’s HIA was due to a secondary contact with Jack Ormondroyd, not caused by Joe Shorrocks. They also felt that Croft’s loss of height was a mitigating factor.

He added that the Referee’s reports stated that the force of the impact was generated by a collision with Jack Ormondroyd, not Joe Shorrocks. Initial contact was by Joe Shorrocks which met the threshold for a sin-binning, but the collision which forced Croft to leave the field was with Ormondroyd.

It was explained that the player was making a “catch tackle” where the arms go underneath to secure the ball, and that the player lifted his head to avoid head-to-head contact.

In their final submissions the club reiterated that the aggravating factors were incompatible with the evidence and that the head-to-head collision with Ormondroyd was the primary cause of Croft’s HIA. They felt the additional three penalty points added to the charge should not have been attributed to the player.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Reasons for Decision:

The Chair confirmed that the footage was reviewed multiple times and that he listened carefully to the submissions made from both sides.

The Tribunal found that Joe Shorrocks made no attempt to lower his tackle height during the tackle. Indeed, he was moving upwards, which made the trajectory of the tackle always upwards towards Croft’s head.

The Tribunal conclude that the grading of the offence at Grade D was correct, based on reviewing the footage and the lack of mitigating factors. The Chair reiterated that it does not matter what tackle technique was used, Joe Shorrocks had the responsibility to avoid any contact with the head. The panel noted that after the initial impact with Joe Shorrocks shoulder/upper arm, there was a flexion of Brodie Croft’s head before the head clash with Jack Ormondroyd occurred.

In conclusion the Tribunal feel that Joe Shorrocks contributed to the collision and must bear responsibility for the resulting HIA and removal of Brodie Croft from the field.

Due to the unsuccessful challenge an additional five penalty points are added to the charge. This takes the total to 20 points and as per the sentencing guidelines results in a three-match suspension.

The club will also lose the £1000 bond lodged to bring the challenge.

Suspension:

3 matches