Player: Marc Jackson (Whitehaven)
Opponents: Bramley Buffaloes
Referee: D Merrick
Adjudication: The Committee noted that in the 2006 season, player Jackson lost several matches through his on field indiscipline. The Committee found it strange that player Jackson still became involved when further possible suspensions could result. Player Jackson was ?treading on thin ice?. Having viewed the DVD and taken into account player Jackson?s explanation, the Committee felt that in this instance a verdict of sending off sufficient was the appropriate course of action.
Player: Gareth Handford (Featherstone Rovers)
Opponents: Halifax
Referee: C Halloran
Adjudication: Having viewed both DVD?s of this incident, the Committee were in no doubt that there was a deliberate head butt and player Handford was guilt of misconduct. It did not matter if contact was made or not. If there was a history of bad feeling, player Handford must learn to allow the match officials to deal with it. This was an act of deliberate violence towards an opponent and could not be overlooked. The Committee felt that player Handford?s misconduct must be marked by a three match suspension and a fine of ?75.
Player: Toa Kohe Love (Widnes Vikings)
Opponents: Batley Bulldogs
Referee: P Taberner
Adjudication: Having viewed the DVD and listened to player Kohe Love?s explanations, it is apparent that you yourself appreciate the seriousness of this incident. That is no doubt why you took yourself off at half time. Misconduct of this type has the real potential for serious injury. The opponent was not looking at player Kohe Love when you struck him. The Committee noted that player Kohe Love had not been before this Committee since 2001 but taking into account the circumstances of this incident, felt that a five match suspension and a fine of ?100 were appropriate.
Player: Mike Burnett (Hull FC Senior Academy)
Opponents: Bradford Bulls
Referee: A Smith
Adjudication: Having viewed the DVD and listened to your explanations and those of your coaches, player Burnett needed to be made aware that brawling of this nature is appalling and would not be tolerated, even if provocation was involved. Player Burnett must learn to let the match officials deal with these matters and not become involved. The Committee found player Burnett guilty of throwing punches and felt that a one match suspension and a fine of ?75 were appropriate. In coming to this decision, the Committee have taken into account player Burnett?s good disciplinary record.
Player: Richie Hawkyard (Bradford Bulls Senior Academy)
Opponents: Hull FC
Referee: A Smith
Adjudication: The Committee noted that player Hawkyard was 21 with a bad disciplinary record but was still getting involved in instances of violence. This is a reckless thing to do. If you continue in this vein, you could be looking at long suspensions from the game. This is another instance where player Hawkyard became involved in something which did not concern him. Having carefully watched the DVD, the Committee had not seen any tremendous violence from player Hawkyard. The Committee did see player Hawkyard go in to protect his team mate but was still involved in violence. If you continue in this way, you will get a bad reputation within the game for becoming involved in violence. Having taken into account player Hawkyard?s and his coach?s explanations, the Committee felt that a two match suspension and a fine of ?75 were appropriate.
Player: Anthony Rourke (Warrington Wolves Junior Academy)
Opponents: Castleford Tigers
Referee: J Cobb
Adjudication: Having viewed the DVD of this incident, the Committee felt that this was a deliberate high tackle towards an opponents? head area. The poor quality of the video did not show the exact contact but it was obviously a deliberate action by the player. The Committee found player Rourke guilty of misconduct in his absence and felt that his misconduct must be marked by a two match suspension and a fine of ?30.
Player: Shaun Flynn (Bramley Buffaloes)
Opponents: Whitehaven
Referee: D Merrick
Adjudication: Having viewed the DVD and taken into account the player Flynn?s admission of guilt by letter, the Committee felt that player Flynn had committed misconduct in the form of a reckless high tackle to an opponent?s head area. The Committee felt that player Flynn?s misconduct must be marked by a one match suspension and a fine of ?30.[/bold]
