How St Helens won against Morgan Knowles’ failed appeal

Morgan Knowles

The Rugby Football League have released the minutes that saw St Helens win the second appeal for Morgan Knowles’ two-match ban.

Wilf George and Danny Sculthorpe were the panel members for the hearing alongside HHJ Roger Thomas.

St Helens originally failed their first appeal. However, the club contested the case. The panel did not hear any fresh evidence, but reviewed the original hearing.

The RFL shared: St Helens’, in the form of CEO Mike Rush, contested that their challenge was based on the fact that the original tribunal’s decision was contradictory and they came to a decision to which no reasonable body could have come.

“The basis for this argument was that as the original tribunal had agreed that the action of Mr Knowles was a professional foul in an attempt to slow the play the ball down; they could not say that either the player’s shoulder or indeed the player’s wrist at any point was in an unnatural position, although it appeared that the attacking player’s shoulder was put to the end of the range of its normal motion.

“Whilst there could be a risk, as with every tackle on the rugby pitch, due to the lack of movement beyond its natural range, there was not an ‘unacceptable risk’ which was an element of the charge and all elements of that charge had to be met.

“Although the original tribunal believed that Mr Knowles’ actions caused the attacking player to twist his trunk in the same direction as Mr Knowles was applying pressure, so as to avoid further injury to himself and was therefore in a vulnerable position such that any further force from Mr Knowles or indeed from any other tackler could easily have caused injury, their opinion that there was an unacceptable risk taken by the player was wrong, as they had already agreed that the arm was never in an unnatural position Mr Knowles’ actions were, therefore, not reckless.

“The Appeals Panel did not hear any fresh evidence as this was not a new hearing but a review of the original hearing, and after deliberation they agreed that the original tribunal’s ruling that there was ‘unacceptable risk’ could not be the case if the player’s arm never extended beyond the natural range of movement and therefore deemed the appeal to be successful.”

PODCAST: Adam Cuthbertson on time at Leeds, Rhinos’ resurgence & Wayne Bennett’s influence

FOLLOW: Keep up with all the latest on the Love Rugby League mobile app and podcast

About Josh McAllister 1908 Articles
Journalist. Joined the Love Rugby League team full time at the start of 2022 having been a freelance reporter for several years. Previously media manager for Swinton and Rochdale.

3 Comments

  1. If the original Tribunal had ruled that Knowles had committed an unacceptable and dangerous tackle,no argument. But they didn’t. They effectively ruled a professional foul,which has never carried a suspension. The whole assessment process needs reviewing.

  2. 95% of the fans to Our Sport are still in shock and angry! reading the decision details on a RFL Tweet, it still shocks me, how our sport should go down a path like this is beyond me, when the Leeds player who appealed his suspension, had a extra game added? What precedent does this now set? I just don’t know, but I think it has set our sport back even more, even past professional referees agree! I feel those in power, will come to seriously regret this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*