Club Finder

Find Your Nearest Rugby League Club

Super League Grand Final 2016

Disciplinary Item


Case Number ON/479/14
Name Bobbie Goulding
Club Barrow Raiders
Shirt Number 34
Match Barrow Raiders v Doncaster RLFC
Competition Championship
Date 08/06/14
Incident considered Disputes a decision of the Referee/Touch Judge - using aggressive language and body language in the 79th minute.
Decision Charge
Details of Charge / Reason for NF Rule – 15.1(g) Detail – Disputes the decision of the Referee of Touch Judge – Other disputes decision Grade – E
Range of Recommended Sanctions in relation to Charged Grade* 4-8
Date of Disciplinary Committee 18/06/14
Evidence provided DVD On Field Report Investigators Report
Decision On Charge
Player plea Not guilty
Summary of CM's submissions on the Charge / evidence The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 79th minute of the above Match which resulted in you being dismissed from the field. In the Panel’s opinion you disputed the decision of an official using aggressive language, aggressive body language and also questioned the integrity of an official. The Panel believe that your actions were sustained, unnecessary and were 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 (Disputes a decision of the Referee or Touch Judges - Other disputes decision). If found to have committed the offence, again in accordance with the On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the normal suspension range for such offence is from a 4 to 8 match suspension. In addition the Tribunal has the power to impose such fine as it considers reasonable.
Summary of Player's submissions on the Charge / evidence Player Coach Bobbie Goulding unable to attend hearing due to Coaching/ Training commitments. Represented by Alan Darfi. Representative pleads not guilty on behalf his client. Mr Goulding available on the telephone. Representative submits that early in the second half Bobbie Goulding had an exchange of view with the touch judge regarding a forward pass. It is alleged an abusive comment was made by the official towards the player. Mr Goulding concedes he remarked back but in his opinion did not over step with his remark. May have used foul language. Player states he was shocked by the officials comment. Later in the game Mr Goulding did shout over to the same tough judge who then entered the field of play and reported the incident to the referee. Both approached the official who advised Mr Goulding to get on with the game. Mr Goulding was substituted and returned to the field later in the game. In the 79th minute Barrow score a try and the referee calls Mr Goulding over and remonstrates with him regarding harassing the same touch judge. Mr Goulding is confused and asks the official to clarify what the problem is. Mr Goulding then approaches the tough judge who is marking the try wanting to clarify the position. He denies using aggressive or intimidating or threatening behaviour towards the official he merely wants clarification. He concedes he may have used some abusive language but this was not directed at the official. The tough judge confers with the official. The player is then dismissed by the referee. Again the player is confused as he is not told why he has been dismissed from the field. He leaves the field of play and makes his way to the tunnel area and into the dressing room. He concedes he did use some abusive language during this period of time but he believes that is part of rugby league. His language was to express a point and not to question any decision made by an official. Player denies being intimidating or threatening any official during this incident. It is submitted by certain witnesses that the player had lost it. The DVD clearly shows the player approaching the official and although he is no doubt disappointed and frustrated there is no evidence of intimidating or threatening behavior towards any official.
Decision Guilty
Reasons for Decision This tribunal have taken great care whilst considering these matters. The submissions made on behalf of the player by his representative have been taken into consideration as have the statements and investigators report submitted by the RFL in support of this case. The tribunal are satisfied that in the 79th minute the referee did speak to the player about his conduct towards the tough judge. The tribunal are satisfied this was a game management “decision “made by the referee as a result of what he had been told. As a result of this the tribunal are satisfied the player lost his temper. He can be seen purposefully walking aggressively towards the tough judge. It is noted he had not been penalised and could have walked away and taken the referees comments on board. The player then sets about a period of intimidation directed at the touch judge during which he used foul and abusive language in an aggressive manner. The tribunal are not satisfied that the player purported to head butt or use words to the touch judge to provoke violence. The player moves from the touch judge and then after a conversation between the referee and the touch judge the player is dismissed from the field. The player moves away in temper and makes his way to the dugout where he uses foul and abusive language towards an interchange official. His body language is aggressive and intimidating and once inside the tunnel area he again in temper continues to direct foul and abusive language towards the officials as they leave the field and enter the tunnel. Taking into account all the circumstances this tribunal feel this player has breached rule 15 1. (g) in disputing a decision of an official. The tribunal feel that a decision can encompass any intervention made by the official and does not have to be an absolute decision. As such this tribunal find the player guilty of using foul and abusive language and disputing the decision of an official.
Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)
Summary of CM's submissions on the appropriate sanction Submissions as statements and verbal evidence presented by witnesses
Summary of Player's submissions on the appropriate sanction Player apologies for his conduct-is a reformed character now from his earlier playing days-is player coach-as this occurred on field hope sanction will be dealt with as a player-previous history of similar offence-suspended sentence was utilised and appeared to have an incentive to behave-integral part of the club
Aggravating Factors
Mitigating Factors
Reasons for Decision The original charge against this player included an offence of questioning the integrity of an official this tribunal are now aware this part of the charge has been discontinued. The original grading was a Grade E. This tribunal feel that a grade D is now appropriate to impose the sanction in this case. The tribunal take this matter very seriously these were sustained actions. They are concerned that the player in his position at the club player/coach and leader behaved in an aggressive and intimidating way both on and off the field using foul and abusive language. This was in the public view. Taking into account all the circumstances this tribunal feel that a 5 match suspension and £50 fine are appropriate.
Suspension 5 matches
Fine £50