No punishment for Messam

Date published: March 24 2015

Chiefs skipper Liam Messam has been found guilty of a dangerous tackle made during his side's clash with the Sharks but will not be punished for his misdemeanour.

A SANZAR Judicial Hearing found Messam guilty of contravening Law 10.4 (m) Acts contrary to good sportsmanship, after he was cited following the Super Rugby match at the weekend.

The incident occurred in the 18th minute of the Super Rugby match which the Sharks won 12-11 in Durban on Saturday.

The SANZAR Judicial Hearing was heard by Jannie Lubbe SC via video conference on 24 March 2015. Adam Magro was the former professional player who attended as a Judicial Technical Adviser.

In his finding, Lubbe ruled the following: "I reviewed the video footage, the Citing Commissioner's report and heard submissions from the player's counsel, Mr Aaron Lloyd, Chiefs' head coach, Dave Rennie and the player himself. The original charge of a breach of Law 10.4 (e) Dangerous Tackling was amended to a breach of Law 10.4 (m) Acts contrary to good sportsmanship. Amending a charge during the course of a hearing is a power allowed to Judicial Officers by the SANZAR Judicial Rules.

"Mr Lloyd did not object to the amendment and Mr Messam then pleaded guilty to the amended charge. I found the entry point to be at the lower end and after careful consideration of possible mitigating and aggravating features involved, the player's exemplary disciplinary record across a lengthy career including 134 Super Rugby matches and 42 Test matches for the All Blacks, I concluded that no further sanction should be imposed as a suspension would be wholly disproportionate to the level of offending involved in this case.

"From the video footage, it is clear that the tackle was initially legal. The right arm then slipped around the neck of Sharks' No. 7 after they went to ground and holding on to the tackled player around his neck in such a manner puts the player in a vulnerable position.

"On the particular facts of this matter and without setting a precedent for these type of actions, it would be wholly disproportionate to the level and type of offending involved to impose a sanction on the player.

"Therefore, the player is found to be guilty of Law 10.4 (m) and no sanction is imposed on the player."