Bellamy to call on rookie for decider after Nelson ban upheld
- Author
- Timestamp
Storm prop Nelson Asofa-Solomona will help prepare his rookie replacement in Sunday's grand final after the NRL judiciary rejected his case to downgrade a high tackle charge.
Asofa-Solomona was suspended for five matches and will also miss the Pacific Championships for New Zealand and possibly the World Club Challenge if the Storm beat three-time premiers Penrith at Accor Stadium.
The Kiwis international had sought to have a Grade 3 Careless High Tackle charge downgraded to Grade 1 but the judiciary panel rejected almost every element of his defence and upheld the finding of the Match Review Committee.
"I'm obviously really disappointed with the result but I had a fair hearing," Asofa-Solomona said after the hearing.
"All of my energy is going to go towards my team getting the result on Sunday."
Melbourne coach Craig Bellamy is now expected to decide between former Catalans prop Joe Chan, the son of ex-Storm forward Alex Chan, and Raiders junior Lazarus Vaalepu.
Chan has played 12 NRL matches since his move from France last year, while Vaalepu has played six NRL matches after being signed on a development contract.
Asofa-Solomona was charged over a high shot on Sydney Roosters prop Lindsay Collins that ruled the Test and Origin star out of the match after the first tackle.
As Collins was deemed to have shown Category 1 HIA symptoms, he would have also missed the grand final if the Roosters had beat the Storm due to the NRL's mandatory 11-day stand-down for concussion.
Roosters doctor Matthew Morgan testified that Collins was ruled out as he played the ball facing his own goal line and needed to be supported by a team-mate after being unsteady on his feet.
The Storm's defence counsel, Nick Ghabar, questioned whether there was evidence to support Morgan's decision and also told the hearing that Collins had come from the field for a HIA 11 times in 113 games.
Ghabar argued that Collins contributed significantly to the force of the tackle as ran the ball from his own line at speed, and did not raise his forearm as a bumper to protect himself.
Asofa-Solomona sent to the bin
He also suggested that Asofa-Solomona, one of the tallest players in the game, would have risked a head clash with either fellow defender Eli Katoa or Collins had he lowered his body height in the tackle.
However, the panel of former Kangaroos forward Bob Lindner and ex-Test, Origin and grand final referee Paul Simpkins rejected those claims in defence of Asofa-Solomona.
NRL judiciary chair Geoffrey Bellew SC also noted in his summary of findings that a comparison with a tackle by Queensland back Val Holmes on NSW prop Payne Haas did not help Asofa-Solomona's case.
Holmes pleaded guilty to a Grade 1 Careless High tackle so the incident was never considered by the judiciary, but the panel found it should have been graded higher.
"The decision of the Panel was unanimous and thus did not require the casting vote of the Chairperson," Bellew wrote.
"The player having pleaded guilty, the Panel was required to consider only the question of grading. In the Panel’s view, the grading of 3 was appropriate for the following reasons:
- First, the Panel was satisfied that any force exerted by player Collins was within the limits that one would reasonably expect from a player bringing up the ball to a defensive line. In the Panel’s view, it remained the case that a significant amount of force was generated by player Asofa-Solomona through his shoulder onto the jaw of player Collins.
- Secondly, the Panel was satisfied on the basis of the evidence of Dr Morgan that player Collins was concussed. Even without the evidence of Dr Morgan, the Panel took into account the objective fact that player Collins had to be steadied by a teammate and, on regaining his feet, faced the wrong way to play the ball. Those matters, in the Panel’s view, were indicative of the concussed state described by Dr Morgan, and consistent with his diagnosis. In the Panel’s view, that diagnosis was consistent with a significant level of force having been exerted by player Asofa-Solomona, which was inconsistent with a base level grade.
- Thirdly, the Panel was not assisted by the fact that player Collins had previously undergone Head Injury Assessments. In the Panel’s view, the more important factor was that he was referred for such an assessment as a consequence of this incident.
- Fourthly, the Panel regarded the duty of care required of all players to be paramount, irrespective of whether a proposed target area was reduced by other factors. That was particularly so in circumstances where player Collins ran straight at the defensive line, with no change of angle.
- Finally, the Panel took the view that the tackle involving player Holmes should arguably have been graded at a higher level. In those circumstances, and consistent with the directions which they had been given, the Panel did not regard that outcome as helpful.
"For all of those reasons the Panel considered that the grading of 3 was appropriate."
