Jan-Hendrik Wessels ban: What the citing officer saw that referee did not

UPDATE: The Bulls are still waiting for confirmation of the date for the appeal against a shocking nine-week ban of Springbok utility forward Jan-Hendrik Wessels.

The appeal could, potentially, take place on Tuesday.

The United Rugby Championship confirmed last week that the Bok front row forward was handed a nine-match ban for acts ‘against the spirit of good sportsmanship‘ of the game.

The panel overseeing the disciplinary process said they were satisfied that an ‘act of foul play’ had occurred.

The incident occurred in the 18th minute of the Bulls’ 28-27 URC win over Connacht in Galway on Friday, October 17.

Connacht flank Josh Murphy and Wessels became entangled at the breakdown. As they went to ground, Murphy lashed out twice, prompting referee Mike Adamson, who was standing directly in front of them, to blow his whistle.

Murphy accused Wessels of testicle grabbing, but there was no conclusive evidence for the match officials to review.

Deliberation with TMO Hollie Davidson also did not yield any confirmation of the alleged claim.

Adamson then issued a 20-minute red card to Murphy, with Wessels remaining on the field.

However, the citing official disagreed with the referee and opted to cite Wessels.

The full report of the hearing has now leaked into the public domain and makes for some interesting reading.

The citing commissioner, after speaking with Connacht No.6 Josh Murphy, decided he had found enough evidence in ‘clipped’ and ‘slowed down’ video footage to proceed with the hearing against the Bok.

“The live television feed, while not conclusive in capturing direct contact, clearly shows Wessels’ right elbow grounded and his head turning backwards toward Murphy,” the Citing Commissioner’s report states.

“Simultaneously, Wessels’ left arm, partially obscured, can be seen moving in an unnatural, arc toward Murphy’s groin area. The movement is not consistent with any legitimate rucking, grasp or binding action.”

This is in stark contrast to what the referee’s report at the hearing stated.

“After penalising a strike to the head by Connacht No.6, C6 [Murphy] made an allegation that he was grabbed in the groin area by Bulls No.2,” Adamson’s report said.

“My TMO reviewed this serious allegation on the big screen but we were unable to see any clear evidence from the angles that were shown of the allegation. It was therefore unsanctioned on the pitch.”

The disciplinary report stated that the TMO and both assistant referees’ reports provide almost identical detail to that provided by the referee.

The recorded audio statement from Murphy was also allowed as evidence at the hearing.

“I felt the player grab my testicles and that’s when I reacted immediately,” the Irish player said.

“That’s what happened, that’s why I reacted because of how he grabbed and squeezed my testicles – I wouldn’t have reacted otherwise.”

The Citing Commissioner’s report was based on his own eye-witness evidence, the evidence of Murphy and the video footage.

The oral evidence provided by the Irish was deemed credible, clear and detailed by the Committee.

While there was a discrepancy with regards to the duration of the incident, this was not given significant weight and did not alter the disciplinary panel’s view of the fundamental aspects of Murphy’s evidence.

According to the full report, the committee’s view is that the video footage supports the evidence put forward by the Citing Commissioner and Murphy, rather than Wessels.

The report also states that factual determinations made by disciplinary committees are ‘on the balance of probabilities‘.

This is a lesser standard than proof ‘beyond a reasonable doubt‘ applied in criminal cases.

@rugby365com