Remorseful Tamou to miss one week after successful downgrade

Wests Tigers captain James Tamou has been successful in having a grade three contrary conduct charge downgraded at the NRL judiciary on Tuesday night.

Tamou will miss this weekend's clash against the Dragons but will be available for the Wests Tigers' final game of the season at Leichhardt Oval, which could potentially be his last in the NRL.

A relieved Tamou said he wouldn't have been able to live with himself if he had played his final game for the club this season after he was sent off in his side's 72-6 loss to the Roosters for dissent towards referee Ben Cummins.

Tamou was hit with a grade three charge which carried a two-match ban. He pleaded guilty but successfully sought a downgrade, meaning he will miss this weekend's clash against the Dragons but be available for round 25.

The 33-year-old pleaded guilty to telling Cummins he was "incompetent" in the 78th minute of the match as he was sent from the field.

Tamou, a 304-game veteran of the game, is no certainty to lace on the boots next season with his future in the NRL up in the air.

“I’ll tell you what, if the result didn’t go well tonight, it would have been hard to live with myself knowing that was my last game just gone on the weekend," Tamou said after the hearing. 

“It’s hard to miss a week, but it’s deserved. It will be hard to watch the boys go out there. [But] to play one more time with them will be unreal, I’m pretty happy with that.

"If it’s my last game in the NRL, I’m not too sure. Once I feel like I’m behind the eight-ball I’ll be the first to put my hand up. We’ll see where the off-season goes.

"Who knows, it could be the last time I suit up on Sunday [week]. Everything is on the table, including retirement."

Summary of reasons for the decision of the judiciary panel

• The decision of the Panel was unanimous and did not require a casting vote from the Chairman pursuant to Rule 89.
• To begin with, the Panel were not greatly assisted by the comparable incident involving player Waerea-Hargreaves.  Bearing in mind the need for consistency, the Panel’s view was that such incident was graded at too low a level.  Further, although the panel accepted that there was some distinction to be drawn between conduct that challenges a referee’s integrity, and that which challenges a referee’s competence, it considered that such a difference was negligible and took the view that any challenge to a referee’s authority is serious.
• That said, the panel did not consider that the player was openly aggressive towards the referee, and were satisfied that he acted out of frustration, on the spur of the moment, without any degree of calculation or premeditation, and in circumstances which, given the state of the match, were extreme.  The Panel did not consider that any of those factors excused the player’s conduct, but did conclude that they explained what had occurred such that the player’s actions should properly be regarded as an aberration. Although the player had been warned for actions of dissent prior to the incident which saw him sent from the field, the Panel took the view that those incidents were of reduced significance, given the significant gap in time between the first and the second, as well as the fact that they were of a different nature to the actions which saw the player dismissed from the field and charged.
• Further, whilst the Panel were mindful of the fact that the rules now permit challenges to decisions by a captain, it considered it necessary to emphasise that such challenges can never be made in the manner in which the player did in the present case.
• In light of the player’s history, and his obvious remorse and contrition which was expressed immediately after the game and in the course of his evidence, the Panel were satisfied that there was no need for any penalty to incorporate any element of personal deterrence.  The Panel were, however, mindful of the necessity for any penalty to be imposed to act as a deterrent to other players who might be minded to act in a similar way.  The Panel was satisfied that the need for any penalty to reflect general deterrence could be met by ascribing a Grade of 2 to the offence, bearing in mind that such a Grade would still result in the imposition of a suspension.   

A recap of the judiciary hearing for Wests Tigers captain James Tamou. 

8:20pm - James Tamou has been successful in having his charge reduced. He will be banned for one match but be available for round 25.

8:00pm - The panel have been deliberating for over 30 minutes, clearly struggling to come to a decision.

7:20pm - Final submissions are behind read out with a result to come shortly.

7:10pm - NRL counsel Lachlan Gyles reminds Tamou of the importance of being respectful towards match officials and tells the tribunal that Tamou's clean record "shouldn't come into it."

"Even the best referees make decisions people don’t agree with. As a highly decorated NRL player you know that things in life don’t go your way, that’s sport isn’t it?," Gyles says to Tamou.

"The game’s been good to you. The truth is what you did on the weekend is a long way away from how you usually play the game.

"It's detrimental to the NRL and not in the spirits of the game. It sends a wrong message to players at all levels."

7:00pm - Footage has been shown of an incident involving Jared Waerea-Hargreaves and referee Gerard Sutton in round 11 this season as a defence case for Tamou.

Waerea-Hargreaves was given a grade one charge after being sin-binned against the Panthers for dissent towards Sutton.

6:45pm - Tamou recalls the send-off moment, indicating it is the first time he has seen it and that he "cannot watch it".

"At that time it was emotions from what happened prior, not thinking straight and mind clouded. Just a complete blow-up," Tamou said.

"100% spur of the moment, on the run, I was not thinking straight. I know I’m guilty, I don’t condone this behaviour. I’m very remorseful towards Ben Cummins. I respect referees very much.

"In 300 games I’ve played I don’t think I’ve ever sworn at a referee. I know their job is hard enough at it is. I understand that and I'm remorseful after the game."

6:30pm - Tamou speaks of the incident in the 77th minute where he throws the ball at Terrell May that prompted Cummins penalising the captain for backchat from the Wests Tigers team.

"The score of the game has really affected where my emotions are at this point," Tamou said.

"Not thinking right but emotional wise just that hot-headedness and feeling nothing is going our way."

6:15pm - NRL Counsel Lachlan Gyles notes three incidents in the lead-up to Tamou's send off, including a warning by referee Ben Cummins to Tamou in the third minute.

"Don't start early," Cummins said, in relation to Tamou complaining about the Roosters having their hand of the ball too much in defence.

6:00pm - The judiciary panel for this evening is Bob Lindner, Michael Hagan and Justice Geoff Bellew. Tamou will be represented by lawyer Nick Ghabar. 

5:30pm - The hearing is set to get underway in around 30 minutes. James Tamou has arrived with his wife Brittney, Wests Tigers CEO Justin Pascoe and football manager Warren McDonnell.