How Matt Peet and Hull KR owner Neil Hudgell led to Peta Hiku’s charge being dropped
Peta Hiku in action for Hull KR in 2024
Fascinating details have emerged on how Peta Hiku’s controversial charge for an incident in the Super League Grand Final was dropped: including a letter of support from Wigan Warriors coach, Matt Peet.
Hiku was charged with Grade E unnecessary contact after an incident involving Warriors forward Junior Nsemba during the early stages of Rovers’ defeat at Old Trafford. Nsemba ultimately left the field for a HIA after a heavy collision – but not before Hiku made contact with Nsemba to check on his welfare.
However, the Match Review Panel noted that they were ‘unsure’ of Hiku’s intentions, leading to them ultimately deciding to charge Hiku with a Grade E offence, and a possible sanction range of three to five matches.
But their view was effectively rubbished by a tribunal on Tuesday evening: and fresh details have come to light about the process that led to Hiku being found not guilty.
Hiku was represented by Robins owner Neil Hudgell for the hearing and the tribunal notes suggested that Wigan pair Jai Field and Liam Marshall challenged Hiku on his actions after placing his hands on Nsemba while he lay prone on the ground.
However, according to the tribunal, it was ‘clear to both, very quickly, that they are satisfied of his intentions’. Furthermore, Hiku’s actions were adjudged to be based on ‘instinct’ and clearly in support of player welfare.
Perhaps most interestingly is the section of the notes which indicate Peet wrote a letter of support to the tribunal, presumably in favour of Hiku’s actions and how there was no foul play attached to the incident whatsoever.
Somewhat damningly, the tribunal found that the RFL submissions were ‘unclear and contradictory’.
“The RFL submissions proposition that any contact makes out the offence,” they said. “In support of which they produce a guidance note from February 2022 (more than 2 & half years ago) that is not enshrined in the rules.
READ NEXT: Salford Red Devils line up Paul Rowley replacement as succession plans begin
“If it is the case that this is an offence of strict liability it ought be properly captured in the rules, which are subject to periodic review and amendment, particularly in relation to head and neck contact.
“In the circumstances the player’s instinctive actions in checking out the injured player’s welfare do not amount to unreasonable contact.
“It would not be a good look for the game if a player in similar circumstances was left to swallow his tongue or choke on his own mouth guard because a player was directed to stand idly by.
“Incidents of this nature need to be reviewed on an individual basis and determined accordingly.”
Ultimately, all of those factors led to Hiku being found not guilty and cleared of any potential suspension.
