Details of ‘overly aggressive’ Michael Chieka exchange revealed as doctor left shaken by ‘intense’ Leicester boss
The details of Michael Cheika's disciplinary hearing have been published in a 12-page report.
Details of Michael Chieka’s disciplinary hearing have been published, with the former Wallabies and current Leicester Tigers head coach described as “overly aggressive, with intense eye contact” in a disagreement with an independent Match Day Doctor.
Chieka has been banned for two games – one game suspended until the end of the season – and has been fined £500 for disrespecting the independent Match Day Doctor.
Following the decision, the RFU have released the 12-page disciplinary hearing detailing the events that occurred on the field and in the Medical Room after the match.
Background
In the full judgement, it was explained that Leicester Tigers players Ollie Chessum and Solomone Kata clashed heads in the 69th minute, resulting in both men falling to the ground and requiring treatment.
Leicester Tigers’ Team Doctor (TD) and the independent Match Day Doctor (IMDD) conducted the HIA 1 protocols.
The independent doctor was content that there was sufficient evidence of a Criteria 1 event with Chessum’s incident which meant that he should not have returned to the field. However, he did not interrupt Leicester’s doctor who was still conducting the HIA1 assessment. During this time, he went to locate Kata and began the HIA1 assessment on the player.
The IMDD returned to the medical room to conduct a review of Kata’s incident with the TD and it was confirmed that there was “overwhelming evidence” of a criteria 1 event (potential loss of consciousness and ataxia). The pair agreed that Kata was unable to return to the pitch.
It was at this point that IMDD asked TD how Chessum was, only to find out that the forward had returned to playing without a joint review and discussion between the doctors. The IMDD explained to TD that there was evidence of a criteria 1 event and that Chessum should not have returned. A quick decision was made to request the fourth official to remove the Tigers forward from the game which was completed before full-time.
It was determined that Chessum’s return to the field of play was due to an error by the team doctor who did not follow the process and confirm the outcome with the IMDD. If this had happened, then the player would not have been allowed to return.
What unfolded in the medical room according to the IMMD
Following the match, Tigers boss Cheika entered the medical room seeking the reasoning as to why Chessum was allowed to return to the field.
According to the IMDD, Chieka was “irritated” and did not conduct himself in “a friendly manner”, adding that “As time went on, for minutes, Mr Cheika was overly aggressive, with intense eye contact, crossed arms. He was dismissive and harsh speaking.”
The IMDD explained to the coach that Chessum should have returned to play, with Cheika reportedly saying: “I’ll instruct my team to overrule your decision” as the doctor believed that the Tigers boss thought that he had overturned the TD’s original decision.
In a letter explaining the events, the IMDD wrote that he said to Cheika that he was “being rude and aggressive” and felt that he was standing too close to him and that his behaviour was not acceptable.
Cheika’s response was to say he was taller than the IMDD and asked whether he should stand back and in the IMDD’s opinion Cheika was being “rather rude and confrontational, and overly aggressive in his body language and voice.”
The IMDD recalled that Mr Cheika said he had worked with people like him before; ‘passive aggressive’; ‘following process’. He felt it was an attack on him as an IMDD.
The IMDD added that he thought that Cheika was trying to intimidate him – the disciplinary panel did not agree but did find that he was disrespectful.
Michael Cheika banned after ‘disrespecting’ match doctor in his first game in charge of Leicester
Cheika’s recollection of the events
In the telling of his recollection of events, Cheika stated that he went to the post-match function after the final whistle before being approached by the Leicester Head of Medical who effectively told him that “they’ve changed the decision on Ollie”.
The Leicester head coach explained that he enquired about whether Chessum had passed his HIA1 and 2 with the IMDD mentioning something about the WiFi. Chieka felt that the IMDD did not like him questioning him.
Cheika maintained that he was challenging the process and how it came about and that the IMDD said to him, in front of the player, that he was not acting in the best interests of Chessum.
Michael Cheika reveals why he took over Leicester Tigers’ coaching reins
The Australian thought that was a tactic to try to humiliate him in front of the player and was extremely disappointed about that. During the disciplinary, Cheika denied that he had personally attack the IMDD’s decision and was merely challenging the procedure and process. He asserted that the IMDD challenged his care for the player’s welfare and said the IMDD was being passive-aggressive and he felt that the IMDD was belittling him.
Chieka said that he never swore at the IMDD and once he realised that the exchange was going nowhere, he left. While the Leicester boss admitted that his voice was raised, he did not shout, and accepted that he did that to make the point. He asserted that intimidation has to have some kind of threat, not body language or having arms crossed and wanted to understand how the process went pear-shaped to allow Chessum back onto the field.
He added that in his 20 years of coaching at the top level, he had not come across the events leading to Chessum being allowed back on the pitch and then taken off again as it is very rare.
Chessum remarks
Meanwhile, Chessum gave evidence but said that he could not recall in too much detail. He said there was frustration from the Leicester side and that Cheika was not attempting to undermine the decision but was querying it.
He believed that the IMDD was “pushing buttons” and being “passive-aggressive” and that the doctor was questioning Cheika’s concern for his welfare.
Both were “giving as good as they got”, it was a disagreement and it was not a one-sided disagreement according to the Leicester forward.