The Balance of Harm

On 12th January 2020, Mose Masoe played for Hull KR in a pre-season friendly against Wakefield. In an attempt to make a tackle on his goal line, Masoe sustained a serious spinal injury, leading to his retirement and life-changing injuries.

Here is a video of Masoe's injury (it is not graphic but viewer discretion advised).

The seemingly innocuous challenge where @hullkrofficial prop Mose Masoe suffered a serious spinal injury in the pre season game against Wakefield Trinity yesterday. pic.twitter.com/937Y0SHs9h

— Arif Ahmed (@ArifAhmedITV) January 13, 2020

It looks quite innocuous doesn't it? In the heat of the moment, some may even have thought Masoe was staying down to get the game stopped so his defensive line could reset.

Out of no malice at all, a fellow Hull KR defender may have attempted to move Masoe so they could get into a better defensive position.

Now imagine what may have happened if Masoe had been moved in these circumstances. What was an exceptionally serious injury may have been even worse.

This is why the RFL come down so hard when they perceive players to move potentially injured players. Even when the player is not injured, the knowledge of the consequence if the opposite was true, is at the forefront of the mind.

In my opinion, when a player moves a potentially injured player in a reckless manner, it is right for a significant suspension to be enforced. An example was a period suspension issued to Leigh's Jamie Acton for this offence in 2017.

Every so often we see an incident where a player is suspended for a prolonged period for moving a potentially injured player. Today, Castleford's Liam Horne received a six match ban for this offence.

This is the incident that has seen Liam Horne handed a Grade E charge for unnecessary contact.

If found guilty, the Castleford Tigers player faces a six-match suspension.

🎥 Sky Sports pic.twitter.com/ULWpB6HiI6

— Matthew Shaw (@M_Shaw1) June 30, 2025

This can be distinguished from the Acton incident for two reasons. Firstly, the level of aggression in Horne's actions is significantly less than Acton's. Secondly, the other player was not actually injured.

In my view, Horne's actions were not aggressive nor malicious nor did they cause harm.

The RFL must balance the need to deter players from moving potentially injured players with proportionality of suspending players for a prolonged periods for instances where no actual harm was caused and the risk of harm was very small.

It is difficult to reconcile Liam Horne receiving a six match suspension for the above incident with Ben Garcia receiving a four match suspension for landing a blindside and forceful punch to the head of an opponent, followed by several further punches, just a few weeks ago. Especially given what we know about head injuries and the 'one punch can kill' campaign.

It is my opinion (others are available) that incidents like Horne should initially be dealt with by way of a warning and a mandatory education cause regarding the dangers of moving a potentially injured individual.

In the event that the same player commits a similar offence within the next 24 months, then a mandatory periodic suspension of, say, 1 month is enforced (increasing further for more offences).

I believe this balances treating the matter with the seriousness it deserves with the proportionality of not banning players for what ultimately prove to be trivialities.

Also this evening, Rhyse Martin avoided a suspension for a similar offence (although Martin's pull on the opponent was less forceful than Horne's).

We all want to achieve consistency, so we say. Your frequent reminder that consistency is perfection. Anything involving humans cannot be perfect nor consistent. Yet the difference between the manner in which the two incidents this week were treated does raise legitimate questions.

Instances like this come up rarely, but having a grown up discussion involving all stakeholders in the sport, trying to remove emotion from the situation seems a sensible way forward.