Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Solomone Kata barred from Premiership until December after red card

Solomone Kata of Leicester Tigers reacts during the Pre-Season friendly match between Leicester Tigers and Scarlets at Mattioli Woods Welford Road Stadium on September 07, 2024 in Leicester, England. (Photo by Malcolm Couzens/Getty Images)

Leicester Tigers centre Solomone Kata has been handed a four-week ban following his red card in the opening match of the Gallagher Premiership season on Saturday against his former side Exeter Chiefs.

ADVERTISEMENT

Referee Tom Foley sent the former rugby league star off on 72 minutes at Sandy Park for making head-on-head contact with Chiefs hooker Jack Yeandle- his second red card in four Premiership matches.

After a hearing before an independent disciplinary panel, the red card was upheld and a four-week ban was given to the 29-year-old, which cannot be reduced as he has already partaken in tackle school (which a player can only attend once).

Video Spacer

‘That Manie Libbok kick will follow him’ | RPTV

The Boks Office crew react to South Africa’s one-point loss to Argentina, with all to play for in Nelspruit this coming weekend. Watch the full show on RugbyPass TV

Watch now

Video Spacer

‘That Manie Libbok kick will follow him’ | RPTV

The Boks Office crew react to South Africa’s one-point loss to Argentina, with all to play for in Nelspruit this coming weekend. Watch the full show on RugbyPass TV

Watch now

Leicester’s fixture against Bath has not been included in the four-match ban as Kata is unavailable for the match through injury. The ban will therefore begin the following week, meaning he will miss fixtures against Newcastle Falcons, Northampton Saints, Gloucester and Saracens.

The panel adjudged the offence warranted a mid-range entry point, which carries a six-week ban, though that was reduced by two weeks as Kata accepted that he had committed foul play at the earliest opportunity on receipt of the papers, he conducted himself in exemplary fashion before and during the hearing and that he apologised immediately after the match.

Fixture
Gallagher Premiership
Leicester
15 - 20
Full-time
Bath
All Stats and Data

With the Premiership taking a break for a month after Leicester’s contest with Saracens, the next time the Tonga international can feature in the league will be the clash with Sale Sharks on December 1 at the Salford Community Stadium.

The Tigers were trailing 14-10 when Kata was dismissed, and their chances of earning a victory looked very slim when they were reduced to 14 men. But a yellow for Exeter’s Will Haydon-Wood soon after meant the numbers were even for the final minutes of the match, as the visitors were able to snatch victory at the death through a Tommy Reffell try.

ADVERTISEMENT

An RFU statement reads: “He was shown a red card for dangerous tackling, contrary to World Rugby Law 9.13, during a game against Exeter Chiefs on 21 September 2024.

“The player challenged the red card threshold, but the panel upheld the red card and suspended Kata for four matches. The player cannot take part in the Coaching Intervention Programme due to already having completed the course in April of this year.

“Due to the player not being available for selection for the fixture against Bath Rugby on 29 September because of injury, this will not be included in the suspended matches.”

Yeandle provided his version of events at the hearing, saying the initial contact was shoulder-on-shoulder, though admitting contact was made with his head.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The initial contact was definitely on my shoulder,” he said. “And in no way, shape or form do I think it was malicious and going with any nasty intent.”

While he admitted that it was an upright tackle, Kata echoed Yeandle’s view and said that the reason he looked dazed after returning to his feet was due to a cramp in his calf rather than a head injury, highlighting that he did indeed pass two Head Injury Assessments.

The final decision from the hearing stated: “This was a reckless tackle, the act of foul play being caused by the player failing to reduce his height sufficiently so as to avoid making head contact. The level of danger was high and the panel agreed with the Referee’s on-field assessment in finding that there was no basis on which to mitigate down from a red card.”

Related

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

1 Comment
f
fl 82 days ago

big opportunity for Dan Kelly!

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 31 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen."


That's not quite my idea.

For a 20 team champions cup I'd have 4 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 4 from the previous years challenge cup. For a 16 team champions cup I'd have 3 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 1 from the previous years challenge cup.


"The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime."

If teams get a tough draw in the challenge cup quarters, they should have won more pool games and so got better seeding. My system is less about finding the best teams, and more about finding the teams who perform at the highest level in european competition.

57 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Would I'd be think"

Would I'd be think.


"Well that's one starting point for an error in your reasoning. Do you think that in regards to who should have a say in how it's setup in the future as well? Ie you would care what they think or what might be more fair for their teams (not saying your model doesn't allow them a chance)?"

Did you even read what you're replying to? I wasn't arguing for excluding south africa, I was pointing out that the idea of quantifying someone's fractional share of european rugby is entirely nonsensical. You're the one who was trying to do that.


"Yes, I was thinking about an automatic qualifier for a tier 2 side"

What proportion of european rugby are they though? Got to make sure those fractions match up! 😂


"Ultimately what I think would be better for t2 leagues would be a third comp underneath the top two tournemnts where they play a fair chunk of games, like double those two. So half a dozen euro teams along with the 2 SA and bottom bunch of premiership and top14, some Championship and div 2 sides thrown in."

I don't know if Championship sides want to be commuting to Georgia every other week.


"my thought was just to create a middle ground now which can sustain it until that time has come, were I thought yours is more likely to result in the constant change/manipulation it has been victim to"

a middle ground between the current system and a much worse system?

57 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Huh? You mean last in their (4 team) pools/regions? My idea was 6/5/4, 6 the max, for guarenteed spots, with a 20 team comp max, so upto 5 WCs (which you'd make/or would be theoretically impossible to go to one league (they'd likely be solely for its participants, say 'Wales', rather than URC specifically. Preferrably). I gave 3 WC ideas for a 18 team comp, so the max URC could have (with a member union or club/team, winning all of the 6N, and Champions and Challenge Cup) would be 9."


That's a lot of words to say that I was right. If (e.g.) Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.


"And the reason say another URC (for example) member would get the spot over the other team that won the Challenge Cup, would be because they were arguable better if they finished higher in the League."

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.


"It won't diminish desire to win the Challenge Cup, because that team may still be competing for that seed, and if theyre automatic qual anyway, it still might make them treat it more seriously"

This doesn't make sense. Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't. Under my system, teams will "compete for the seed" by winning the Challenge Cup, under yours they won't. If a team is automatically qualified anyway why on earth would that make them treat it more seriously?


"I'm promoting the idea of a scheme that never needs to be changed again"

So am I. I'm suggesting that places could be allocated according to a UEFA style points sytem, or according to a system where each league gets 1/4 of the spots, and the remaining 1/4 go to the best performing teams from the previous season in european competition.


"Yours will promote outcry as soon as England (or any other participant) fluctates. Were as it's hard to argue about a the basis of an equal share."

Currently there is an equal share, and you are arguing against it. My system would give each side the opportunity to achieve an equal share, but with more places given to sides and leagues that perform well. This wouldn't promote outcry, it would promote teams to take european competition more seriously. Teams that lose out because they did poorly the previous year wouldn't have any grounds to complain, they would be incentivised to try harder this time around.


"This new system should not be based on the assumption of last years results/performances continuing."

That's not the assumption I'm making. I don't think the teams that perform better should be given places in the competition because they will be the best performing teams next year, but because sport should be based on merit, and teams should be rewarded for performing well.


"I'm specifically promoting my idea because I think it will do exactly what you want, increase european rugyb's importance."

how?


"I won't say I've done anything compressive"

Compressive.

57 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Will Bristol's daredevil 'Bears-ball' deliver the trophy they crave? Will Bristol's daredevil 'Bears-ball' deliver the trophy they crave?
Search