On Monday the National Rugby League issued a breach notice to the Penrith Panthers proposing a mammoth $50,000 fine for the club and a 5-match suspension for Panthers trainer Corey Bocking. The incident at the centre of the controversy was a trainer running in front of a kicker before he kicked for goal.
In doing so, the NRL served up a big fat middle finger to the principles of natural justice and its own commitment to “provide a system that is fair, equitable and consistent for all participants and players” [Judiciary Code – NRL | Operations].
In an astonishing press release, the NRL declared that “the proposed penalty takes into account previous breaches by Penrith Panthers trainers.”
Mind bogglingly, none of the “previous breaches” involved Corey Bocking, which begs the question, on what basis can an employee, contractor or licensee be punished due to the alleged conduct of their colleagues?
Bocking’s suspension is a record breaker. It is the biggest suspension handed to any participant in the National Rugby League this year, as is the proposed fine.
His crime? Running in front of a goal kicker before he kicked for goal.
Let’s compare Bocking’s suspension to the other penalties dished out to NRL participants last weekend.
Wests Tigers forward Alex Seyfarth was rubbed out for 3 weeks for a careless high tackle for the third time this season. 3 whacks to the head of opposition players, and his penalty is 20% less than that handed down to Bocking and the Panthers.
Felise Kaufusi will miss two weeks – his offence – dangerous contact in tackling opposition player Jacob Laban who had to be helped from the field following the incident, injured.
Wests Tigers prop Alex Twal copped a $1,000 fine and NO SUSPENSION for deliberately tripping Roosters skipper James Tedesco, meanwhile Warriors player Samuel Healey was fined $2,500 with NO SUSPENSION for two acts of physically endangering his opponents in the form of a dangerous contact charge, and a crusher tackle charge.
Yet, the NRL would have us believe that the most egregious incident of the weekend was a clean skin trainer running in front of a kicker before he kicked for goal.
In its press release, the NRL said “It is alleged the trainer unnecessarily interfered with and distracted Gold Coast Titans player Jayden Campbell as he was attempting a conversion kick, in breach of the NRL Operations Manual and NRL Code of Conduct.”
Let’s entertain the notion that this passes the pub test for a split second.
For the purpose of this exercise, we need to ignore the 18,000 strong crowd jeering and cheering from the grandstands distracting the kicker. We also need to ignore the stats of kicker Jayden Campbell who despite having a blinder on the weekend has a conversion rate of just north of 75%, less from the sideline. Finally, we need to ignore the fact that he was not prevented from kicking. All he had done was place a ball on a kicking tee at the time of the incident.
The NRL Operations Manual appears not to be publicly available, but what we do know is that the NRL website promotes that its penalty framework for on field misconduct aims to comply with the applicable rules of natural justice.
“Natural justice” is a complex notion, but it generally requires that a decision be based on relevant evidence with a disregard for irrelevant or prejudicial information.
What is more irrelevant than what other trainers have done in unrelated matches?
What is more prejudicial than making a patsy of one trainer for the alleged conduct of others?
The NRL’s decision is akin to punishing a player for the unrelated conduct of his teammates. An absurd proposition by every measure.
