Case Number:

ON/0051/26

Deacon Swarbrick #3, St Helens

Competition:

Warm Up Matches

Match:

St Helens v Wakefield Trinity

Match Date:

2026-01-31

Incident:

Head Contact

Decision:

Charge

Charge Detail:

Law 15.1 (b)

Head Contact

Grade D

Fine:

£50

Sanctions:

2 Match Suspension & Fine

Decision On Charge

Player plea:

Not Guilty

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

Following a Match Review Panel meeting held on 5th February 2026, 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 53 10 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 12 Penalty Points. In addition, your opponent left the field and was unable to return to the field of play further to medical evidence provided by the opposition club. Therefore, an additional 3 Penalty Points meaning the total Penalty Points for this offence is 15.

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 £25 fine.

• Match Review Panel reviewed an incident in the above match.
• The referee sin binned Mr Swarbrick following the incident.
• The report stated the following:
Wakefield were in possession. Their number 6 Kian McGann (KM) sidestepped St Helens number 3 Deacon Swarbrick (DS). DS hit KM with his shoulder to the head. KM stayed on the floor and was eventually able to leave the field with assistance. He was ruled out for the rest of the game with concussion. I temporarily dismissed DS, taking into account the mitigating factors that he had been sidestepped and there did not appear to be a high level of force in my view, and the aggravating factor that serious injury had been caused, and that he had made no attempt to lower his height, particularly bearing in mind that tackles above the armpit are illegal at reserves level.
• The MRP state accept that the footage does not show point of contact however there is only one player responsible for the contact within the footage aligned to the referee’s report that it is Mr Swarbrick that has contacted the opponent with his shoulder.
• 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 therefore 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 believe that there were no mitigating factors. The referee states that Mr Swarbrick had been sidestepped however whilst the Match Review Panel accept there was a sidestep from the opponent it did not affect Mr Swarbrick’s positioning but that of his teammates going into contact.
• The aggravating factors are:
- The trajectory of the tackler’s shoulder/arm is always going towards the ball carrier’s head.
- The player does not lower his height to avoid making contact with the ball carrier’s head.
- Ball carrier fails HIA.
• The Match Review Panel believe that taking all factors into account a Grade D is appropriate in this instance.

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

Player in attendance alongside Ian Talbot (Performance Manager). Player pleads Not Guilty.

The club disputed the allegation of shoulder-to-head contact, suggesting alternative causes for the injury caused to the opponent. They felt DS’s tackle technique was good and that the inconclusive nature of the footage.

Decision:

Guilty

Reasons for Decision:

The panel were in agreement with the Compliance Manager and found that the Referee was detailed in his testimony and consistent with the information he had provided in his report.

They concluded that the incident involved forceful and dangerous contact between the shoulder and the head, which resulted in a failed Head Injury Assessment.

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)

Reasons for Decision:

As the challenge to the penalty notice was unsuccessful DS now sees his penalty notice increased 20 penalty points.

This now results in a 3-match suspension along with a fine of £50. The club will also lose their bond brought to lodge the challenge.

Suspension:

3 matches