Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Red-carded Williams and Bath kitman Middleton learn their fate

(Photo by Bob Bradford/CameraSport via Getty Images)

Bath duo Mike Williams and kit manager Steve Middleton have both been banned following separate incidents during last Saturday’s Gallagher Premiership defeat at home to Wasps. Williams, the soon-to-be 30-year-old forward, was red-carded in the 47th minute by referee Ian Tempest for dangerous play at a ruck on Jimmy Gopperth while Middleton was ordered from the field of play for comments made to the referee. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Williams contested the charge but was given a four-week suspension by the independent disciplinary panel comprising Jeremy Summers (chair) with Mitch Read and Tony Wheat. The player is free to play again on December 7.

In the written judgment it was reported that in the evidence provided by Bath player Williams that “he was clear his bicep had contacted with Gopperth’s shoulder because he had noticed a ‘corker’ on his bicep that had resulted from the incident. 

Video Spacer

Dan Biggar – Why the Autumn Nations Series is the most brutal of all

Video Spacer

Dan Biggar – Why the Autumn Nations Series is the most brutal of all

“He did not feel that he had come into contact with Gopperth’s head or neck at any time and he had not grasped Gopperth in a headlock. He had effected a very dominant clear out and Gopperth had gone straight backwards. At no point had he acted illegally and he had attempted to wrap.

“In response to questions from the panel, the player indicated that he had changed his technique to address the new laws relating to head contact. It was put to him that that the action he had deployed to clear out Gopperth was high risk and highly dangerous. In response, he stated that he had practised the technique at low speed.

“The player had given clear evidence that he had not made contact with Gopperth’s head and should be viewed as a credible witness. There was nothing in the footage that allowed the panel to discount his evidence. The rearview angle, in particular, supported the player’s case that contact was bicep to shoulder. There was insufficient evidence to safely conclude that there had been contact with Gopperth’s head.”

However, the panel went on to make the following findings which included: “The player’s right bicep initially struck the left-hand side of Gopperth’s face, and the player’s position that the contact had been with the shoulder was rejected.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The player’s right forearm had then hooked up and made contact with the neck and/or chin of Gopperth and the player’s defence that he had hooked across Gopperth’s chest was similarly rejected. The contact with the head involved a high degree of force and a high degree of danger.

“After careful consideration, the panel was satisfied that the player had been attempting to lawfully clear out Gopperth, as demonstrated by his actions. He had, however, committed to a high-risk technique which he had then executed imperfectly.”

With no mitigation applied to the four-week entry point, Williams will now miss this weekend’s Bath Premiership match versus Leicester, the Premiership Cup game against Gloucester and the Premiership game versus Exeter. However, he can become available for the fourth game of his sanction, the December 4 league game versus Northampton, if he successfully completes a tackle school intervention. Tackle school was something recently undertaken by Sale’s Rohan Janse van Rensburg.

Regarding kit manager Middleton, he accepted the charge and was given a one-match suspension by the same independent disciplinary panel. This prevents him from attending next weekend’s game in any capacity other than a spectator. Middleton also needs to deliver a presentation to the non-playing members of staff at Bath on the need to uphold standards and the core values of the game by December 2. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“The kit manager accepted the charge of misconduct brought against him and apologised for his behaviour. The panel considered that a period of suspension was required, consistent with other recent decisions and that a strong message needed to be issued to the game. There is a growing problem with the conduct of non-playing personnel and disciplinary panels will not hesitate in taking strong action to combat this.”

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

S
SK 5 hours ago
What is the future of rugby in 2025?

Set pieces are important and the way teams use them is a great indication of how they play the game. No team is showcasing their revolution more than the Springboks. This year they have mauled less and primarily in the attacking third. Otherwise they have tended to set like they are going to maul and then play around the corner or shove the ball out the back. They arent also hitting the crash ball carrier constantly but instead they are choosing to use their width or a big carrying forward in wider areas. While their maul is varied the scrum is still a blunt instrument winning penalties before the backs have a go. Some teams have chosen to blunt their set piece game for more control. The All Blacks are kicking more penalties and are using their powerful scrum as an attacking tool choosing that set piece as an attacking weapon. Their willingness to maul more and in different positions is also becoming more prominent. The French continue to play conservative rugby off the set piece using their big bruisers frequently. The set piece is used differently by different teams. Different teams play different ways and can be successful regardless. They can win games with little territory and possession or smash teams with plenty of both. The game of rugby is for all types and sizes and thats true in the modern era. I hope that administrators keep it that way and dont go further towards a Rugby League style situation. Some administrators are of the opinion that rugby is too slow and needs to be sped up. Why not rather empower teams to choose how they want to play and create a framework that favours neither size nor agility. That favours neither slow tempo play or rock n roll rugby. Create a game that favour both and challenge teams to execute their plans. If World Rugby can create a game like that then it will be the ultimate winner.

35 Go to comments
J
JW 11 hours ago
'Let's not sugarcoat it': Former All Black's urgent call to protect eligibility rules

Yep, no one knows what will happen. Thing is I think (this is me arguing a point here not a random debate with this one) they're better off trialing it now in a controlled environment than waiting to open it up in a knee jerk style reaction to a crumbling organtization and team. They can always stop it again.


The principle idea is that why would players leave just because the door is ajar?


BBBR decides to go but is not good enough to retain the jersey after doing it. NZ no longer need to do what I suggest by paying him to get back upto speed. That is solely a concept of a body that needs to do what I call pick and stick wth players. NZR can't hold onto everyone so they have to choose their BBBRs and if that player comes back from a sabbatical under par it's a priority to get him upto speed as fast as possible because half of his competition has been let go overseas because they can't hold onto them all. Changing eligibility removes that dilemma, if a BBBR isn't playing well you can be assured that someone else is (well the idea is that you can be more assured than if you only selected from domestic players).


So if someone decides they want to go overseas, they better do it with an org than is going to help improve them, otherwise theyre still basically as ineligible as if they would have been scorning a NZ Super side that would have given them the best chance to be an All Black.

147 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does South Africa have a future in European competition? Does South Africa have a future in European competition?
Search