Case Number:

ON/1144/25

Sam Webb-Campbell #27, Hunslet

Competition:

Championship

Match:

Bradford Bulls v Hunslet RLFC

Match Date:

2025-07-04

Incident:

Punching/Striking

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Law 15.1 (a)

Punching – Punching– makes contact with the head of an opponent

Grade E

Sanctions:

6+

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 10th July, you are charged with misconduct for a breach of Law 15.1(a) during the above match.

The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred at approx. 01 49 00 footage time of the above match. In the Panel’s opinion you punched your opponent making contact with the head. In the Panel’s opinion this is serious misconduct, has the potential for serious injury and is 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 E offence - Punching – makes contact with the head of an opponent

The normal suspension range for such offence is 36 Penalty Points plus (6 match suspension plus).
• Match Review Panel reviewed an incident in the above match.

• Mr Webb Campbell was dismissed because of his actions.

• The touch judges report who saw Mr Webb Campbell’s action stated that, “In approximately the 73rd minute of the game Bradfords Uili Liu and Hunslet’s Sam Webb-Campbell came together in back play which was instigated by Liu pushing Webb-Campbell, Webb-Campbell then retaliated to this by throwing a punch at Liu making contact with the head area. Lui then retaliated and threw a punch back making contact with the head area. I reported this to the referee Cameron Worsley and both players was dismissed from the field of play.’”

• The Match Review Panel agrees with the touch judge’s assessment that Mr Liu is the instigator.

• However, the Match Review Panel does not believe that Mr Webb Campbell’s actions of throwing a punch at the head area of the opponent, which is evident on the footage constitute to self defence.

• The Match Review Panel believed that there were other options available to Mr Webb Campbell other than punching and his actions were in retaliation to being pushed by his opponent.

• Grade E due to:
- Violent, unnecessary actions.
- Potential for injury. Area of concern for the game
- Violent act which brings the sport into disrepute and portrays the game in a negative light.

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

Player in attendance alongside Damian Irvine & Darren Higgins (Director of Rugby). Player pleads guilty.

DI described the incident, stating that SWC was getting back onside when the opponent approached him. The opponent led with a forearm which SWC reacted to by throwing a punch.

SWC explained that he had brushed past the opponent, who then followed him and made contact with him in the neck or chin area. Feeling threatened he then struck out, believing the player was going to throw a punch at him.

He added that after the initial punch, he missed with another, and the opponent then hit him on the chin. This was the end of the altercation between them.

DI argued that the punch was in self-defence and that the grading should be lower, citing SWC’s clean record and the circumstances of the incident.

Decision:

Guilty plea

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal reviewed the footage again in light of the submissions heard. They concluded that the offence was correctly graded by the Match Review Panel.

The Tribunal do not believe the players actions were in “self-defence” as the player had planted his feet and leaned forward into an attacking stance instead of retreating, which would have de-escalated the situation.

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Summary of CM's submissions on the appropriate sanction:

The MRP believe the offence warranted 36 penalty points. One point could be deducted due to the players dismissal in the second half. This would therefore reduce the charge to 35 penalty points which would result in a suspension of five matches.

Summary of Player's submissions on the appropriate sanction:

DI presented several mitigating factors, including SWBC’s previous good record, the provocation from the opponent and his genuine remorse. He felt that a four-match suspension would be more appropriate, which due to one point deduction for the sending off would be mitigated to a three-match suspension and fine.

Reasons for Decision:

The Tribunal considered the players good record and remorse which was demonstrated by a guilty plea. This was a significant factor in the decision-making process.

They note there was an element of provocation involved in the incident and this was taken into account when determining the sanction.

Suspension:

5 matches