EPCR SHORT JUDGMENT FORM

Transcription

1 EPCR SHORT JUDGMENT FORM Match Lyon Vs Cardiff Blues Club s Country France Competition European Rugby Championship Cup Date of match Match venue Matmut Stadium de Garland, Lyon Rules to apply EPCR Disciplinary Rules 2018/19 PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE Player s surname Carizza Date of birth Forename(s) Manuel Plea Admitted Not Admitted Club name Lyon SELECT: Red card Citing Other (specify) Offence 9.12 Striking with any part of the arm (including stiff arm tackles) Summary of Sanction 3 week suspension (MR entry point 6 weeks, no aggravation, 3 weeks mitigation) HEARING DETAILS Hearing date Hearing venue Sheraton Hotel, CDG airport, Paris Chairman/JO Samantha Hillas Panel member 1 Donal Courtney Panel member 2 Anthony Wheat Disciplinary Officer Liam McTiernan Appearance Player Yes No Appearance Club Yes No Player s Representative(s): Gérald Gambetta Other attendees: Maite Ganzin (Independent interpreter) Mike Hamlin (EPCR observing) List of documents/materials provided to player in advance of hearing: 1. Citing Commissioner report Shaun Gallagher 2. Ian Tempest (AR) Wayne Falla (AR) David Grashoff (TMO) Gafyn Cooper (Cardiff Blues) enclosing short statement from the victim player (Jarrod Evans) Statement of the Player (undated) 7. ed submissions Liam McTiernan Match footage SUMMARY OF ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF CITING/REFEREE S REPORT/FOOTAGE Disciplinary Decision Page 1 of 5

2 The following is taken from the citing report: Lyon recycle the ball from a ruck deep in the Cardiff Blues 22. The ball is passed to the left to the Lyon No 19, Manual CARIZZA running as first receiver, supported by his team mate No 6. He catches the ball as the Cardiff No 10 Jarrod EVANS, advances from the defensive line to tackle him. The Lyon No 19 immediately transfers the ball to his left arm and raises his right arm in a dynamic movement and makes forceful contact to the right side of the Cardiff player's jaw/cheek with his right forearm, as the Cardiff player makes a legitimate attempt to tackle him. The force of the impact causes the Cardiff No 10 to fall to the floor, where he can be seen to clutch his face/head in obvious discomfort. After a short period, he gets to his feet and resumes into the game. There is no match official intervention, the referee Mr. DOYLE, taking up an oblique position 5 metres away with an obstructed view. I consider this to be an act of foul play, which satisfies the red card criteria, in that the forearm of the offending player, connected with significant force to the right side of the of the jaw/cheek of a defending player who was making a legitimate attempt to tackle the ball carrier. In doing so, some injury was caused and I therefore cite the Lyon No 19, Manual CARIZZA, for an offence of striking an opponent with his right forearm, contrary to law 9.12 of World Rugby's International laws of the game. The citing report further stated (under the heading Brief Report of Discussion with Match Officials ) Incident not seen by match officials. Liam McTiernan confirmed during hearing that the referee J P Doyle had also now confirmed he did not detect the incident during the game. ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF OTHER EVIDENCE (e.g. medical reports) 1. There was no medical evidence available. The statement of Jarrod Evans said he had some mild soreness post game and a slight headache. 2. The statement from Jarrod Evans states that the Player s forearm made contact with his upper left cheek/jaw and the impact knocked him to the ground. 3. The Panel viewed the match footage. This had been provided by Cardiff Blues and shows the incident from two angles. The match footage bears out the contents of the Citing Commissioner s report and Jarrod Evans statement. SUMMARY OF PLAYER S EVIDENCE He accepts the incident is a red card offence, regrets the incident and welcomed the opportunity to explain what happened He received the ball from right to left. There was little momentum going forward and the Cardiff No.10 rushed up on him quite quickly He turned to the left, intending to spin out of the tackle A Lyon player came up behind him to latch on which gave him some momentum, but he did not realise he was so close and this prevented him spinning out of the tackle There was no premeditation He is a very experienced player and has played 35 games in the Champions Cup, during which he has never received either a yellow or red card He has only received one red card in the whole of his career He is on a short term (three month) contract which ends in two weeks and this is a very unfortunate end to his career He sent Jarrod Evans a message to say he was sorry. Evans replied to say he was aware it was not intentional He apologised unreservedly for the incident FINDINGS OF FACT Disciplinary Decision Page 2 of 5

3 The Panel reminded itself that the standard of proof to be applied in this case is the balance of probabilities. It considered the totality of the evidence, including the fact that the Player admitted the incident as described in the Citing Commissioner s report and Jarrod Evans statement, admitted the 9.12 charge was justified and this was a red card offence. The Player confirmed that his actions were not intentional and accepted his evidence that Jarrod Evans also accepted this was the case. Taking into account the Player s evidence and the statement from Jarrod Evans as summarised above, the Panel found:- 1. During the game between Lyon and Cardiff Blues on , in the course of an attempted tackle on the Player by Jarrod Evans, the Player raised his right forearm and made contact with Evans upper left cheek/jaw. 2. That this was an act of foul player. 3. This was not intentional, but was a reckless action on the part of the Player. 4. That this was an act of foul player. 5. That it passed the red card test in line with the training presentation emanating from the Marcoussis conference, which had been circulated to all EPCR clubs prior to the start of the competition. DECISION Breach admitted Proven Not proven Other disposal (please state below) SANCTIONING PROCESS ASSESSMENT OF SERIOUSNESS Assessment of Intent R (a)-(b) PLEASE TICK APPROPRIATE BOX Intentional/deliberate Reckless State reasons The Panel accepted the Player did not intend to make contact with Jarrod Evans upper left/cheek jaw. There was no evidence to gainsay his account and the Player s evidence was entirely credible. Gravity of player s actions R (c) Jarrod Evans did not require medical attention and resumed play Nature of actions R (d) During the course of the tackle, the Player attempted to spin out of the tackle, but was pushed from behind by one of his own players attempting to latch on and unfortunately his forearm, which was raised, made contact with Jarrod Evans upper left cheek/jaw Existence of provocation R (e) Whether player retaliated R (f) Self-defence R (g) Disciplinary Decision Page 3 of 5

4 Effect on victim R (h) The impact knocked Jarrod Evans to the ground, but he did not require medical attention and continued in the game. He complained of mild soreness and a slight headache after the game Effect on match R (i) None Vulnerability of victim R (j) Contact with the head Level of participation/premeditation R (k) Not premeditated Conduct completed/attempted R (l) Completed Other features of player s conduct R (m) ASSESSMENT OF SERIOUSNESS CONTINUED Entry point Top end* Weeks Mid-range Weeks 6 Low-end Weeks *If Top End, the JO or Panel should identify, if appropriate, an entry point between the Top End and the maximum sanction and provide the reasons for selecting this entry point, below. In making this assessment, the JO/Committee should consider World Rugby Regulations (a), (h), and (i) or the equivalent provisions within the Tournament Rules referred to above. Reasons for selecting Entry Point above Top End ADDITIONAL RELEVANT OFF-FIELD AGGRAVATING FACTORS Player s status as an offender of the Laws of the Game R (a) Disciplinary Decision Page 4 of 5

5 The Player does not have a clean disciplinary record, but this was not considered to be an aggravating feature Need for deterrence R (b) Following World Rugby guidance, all acts of foul play involving the head of the victim player are considered to be at least a midrange offence Any other off-field aggravating factors R (c) None Number of additional weeks: 0 RELEVANT OFF-FIELD MITIGATING FACTORS Acknowledgement of guilt and timing R (a) The Player confirmed that he recklessly committed an act of foul play which passed the red card test and he apologised unreservedly Player s disciplinary record/good character R (b) The Player received a red card last season for being involved in an on field incident which included a strike, which was accepted as being retaliatory/in self-defence and for which he received a one week suspension. His disciplinary record is otherwise clean. Youth and inexperience of player R (c) The player is aged 34 and extremely experienced, having played professionally since 2005 Conduct prior to and at hearing R (d) Exemplary Remorse and timing of remorse R (e) The Player sent a message to Jarrod Evans to apologise Other off-field mitigation R (f) Number of weeks deducted: 3 Summary of reason for number of weeks deducted: The Player s conduct at the hearing was exemplary: he was insightful and understanding of World Rugby s approach to incidents involving contact with the head. He had apologised to Evans for the incident. Evans did not require medical attention and continued in the game. There is no lasting injury. At the first opportunity following the citing, the Player prepared a statement directed to the Panel confirming the incident and setting out what had happened. Before the Panel, he was unequivocal that this Disciplinary Decision Page 5 of 5

6 was an act of foul play which passed the red card test. The Panel took the view the maximum reduction in sanction, namely 3 weeks was appropriate in all the circumstances *NOTE ON MEANINGFUL SANCTION* This is an unusual case because the Player has only two weeks left of his Lyon contract. His three week suspension means he will miss the last two games of his contract, namely the Saracens game on and the Bordeaux game on The Player says Lyon have not yet confirmed to him that his contract will be extended, although this is something he is hopeful about. If his contract is not extended, then his current intention is to retire from rugby not just from professional rugby, but from rugby altogether. The Panel shares the Player s hopes that his contract is extended and his 3 week suspension will therefore continue to the next weekend, which would mean his suspension will end on , leaving him free to play again on If the Player s Lyon contract comes to an end and he retires from rugby altogether, then his suspension will terminate. The Player confirmed that in the event his Lyon contract comes to an end and he then plays for another club, he would carry over the remaining week s suspension to his first game for that club. SANCTION NOTE: PLAYERS ORDERED OFF ARE PROVISIONALLY SUSPENDED PENDING THE HEARING OF THEIR CASE, SUCH SUSPENSION SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN SANCTIONING R Total sanction 3 Weeks Sending off sufficient Sanction commences Sanction concludes Free to play * (*subject to Note above) Signature (JO or Chairman) SAMANTHA HILLAS Date NOTE: YOU HAVE THE RIGHT OF APPEAL AGAINST THIS DECISION AS SET OUT IN REGULATION 8.1 AND 8.2 OF THE EPCR DISCIPLINARY REGULATIONS. YOUR ATTENTION IS SPECIFICALLY DRAWN TO THE TIME LIMIT AND DIRECTIONS/REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO AN APPEAL SET OUT IN REGULATION TO OF THE REGULATIONS Disciplinary Decision Page 6 of 5