Case Detail
Case Number:
ON/1155/25
Joe Ofahenguae #32, Leigh
Competition:
Super League
Match:
Leigh Leopards v Wigan Warriors
Match Date:
2025-07-04
Incident:
Late contact on passer
Decision:
Charge
Charge Detail:
Law 15.1 (i)
Dangerous Contact - A defending player makes contact with an opponent after the ball has been released by an opponent in a vulnerable position which causes flexion to the head, neck or spinal column on an attacking player, which poses an unacceptable risk of injury to that player.
Grade B
Sanctions:
3 Penalty Points & Fine
Decision On Charge
Player plea:
Not Guilty
Summary of CM's submissions on the Charge / evidence:
SUMMARY OF CM’s
SUBMISSIONS ON THE CHARGE/EVIDENCE:
Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 7th July 2025, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(i) during the above match.
The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred at approx. 01 24 57 footage time of the above match. In the Panel’s opinion you have made late contact on the opposing player in a vulnerable position after the ball has been released causing flexion to the head and neck. In the Panel’s opinion, they believed your actions were 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 B offence – Dangerous Contact - A defending player makes contact with an opponent after the ball has been released by an opponent in a vulnerable position which causes flexion to the head, neck or spinal column on an attacking player, which poses an unacceptable risk of injury to that player.
The starting suspension range for such an offence is 3 Penalty Points.
• Match Review Panel reviewed an incident in the above match.
• The Match Review Panel are of the view that the opponent is contacted after the ball has been released.
• Contained within the footage, the Match Review Panel’s position is that the opponent Mr Smith’s body does not seemingly move prior to him releasing the ball but only afterwards.
• Therefore, the Match Review Panel apply the framework for late contacts on passers and kickers in this instance.
• There is considerable flexion so therefore this is low level force in respect of a late contact.
• The MRP opinion is that there is no mitigating factors present. The attacking player is moving away from the opponent; contact is in the back and there is no attempt to moderate the contact.
• In terms of aggravation, the nature of the contact the Match Review Panel suggest is unnecessary given the level of flexion.
• Therefore, the MRP are of the opinion that this is a Grade B offence.
Summary of Player's submissions on the Charge / evidence:
Player in attendance alongside Derek Beaumont (Chair), Adrian Lam (Head Coach) and Neil Jukes (CEO). Player pleads not guilty.
DB argued that the initial contact occurred before the ball was released, which would invalidate the Match Review Panel's findings. He requested to share screen and audio evidence to support this claim.
He highlighted the importance of the audio evidence, which included the Referee's on-field directions indicating that the player took the ball to the line and that the contact was fine.
DB requested permission to share his screen to present still images from the footage, which he believed would assist in determining whether the ball had been released at the time of contact.
Decision:
Not Guilty
Reasons for Decision:
This is a decision of the Operational Rules Tribunal arising out of a report by the Match Review Panel who had reviewed a game between Leigh and Wigan identifying an allegation of late contact.
The player had challenged the issue of guilt and therefore the matter was referred to the Tribunal for consideration.
After having seen the footage presented by the RFL and reviewed some further stills and footage with sound recording, the Tribunal reminded itself that the burden of proving the case was on the RFL.
It was clear to the Tribunal that the footage did not support the claim of late contact. In fact, going further, it appeared to the Tribunal that the ball had not left the attacking player’s left hand at the time of contact.
In those circumstances, the Tribunal found the player not guilty of the allegation.