WE REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THOSE THAT HAVE CONTACTED US ASKING WHERE OUR MATCH REPORTS HAVE GONE. 

IT IS GREAT TO KNOW THEY WERE SO POPULAR ACROSS THE HOCKEY COMMUNITY.

UNFORTUNATELY THOSE AT ENGLAND HOCKEY DIDN'T AGREE AND HAVE SERVED US WITH A MISCONDUCT CHARGE.

PLEASE SEE FULL DETAILS BELOW (CERTAIN WORDS HAVE BEEN REDACTED TO AVOID OFFENCE):

ENGLAND HOCKEY MISCONDUCT COMPLAINT:

JASON WILTSHIRE

V

NEWENDEN NOMADS HOCKEY CLUB

Complainant

Respondent

1. On 28 October 2024, Jason Wiltshire (“JW”), as Head of Legal & Governance at England Hockey (“EH”), raised a complaint against Newenden Nomads Hockey Club (“NNHC”) on the grounds of misconduct, pursuant to the England Hockey Disciplinary Regulations (“the Regulations”).

2. In summary, the nature of the complaint is that NNHC’s website (“the Website”) includes a number of match reports which in turn contain material which offends the Regulations and “Spirit of Hockey Code of Conduct” (“the Code”).

3. The complaint was preceded by comments and informal complaints by a number of hockey clubs.

a) On 16 October 2024, after being made aware of a number of complaints from various hockey clubs regarding the Website, Mark Hollis, South East Area Chair made a request to NNHC to remove certain offending parts of the Website. Mark Hollis received a prompt response from Philip Morris of NNHC, stating that the club would remove the offending material. However, the offending material was not removed.

b) On 19 October 2024, EH received an email from Edward Carter, the Chair of Sittingbourne Hockey Club complaining about the content of the Website. This was forwarded to JW to consider.

c) On 22 October 2024, EH’s Development Manager confirmed to JW that she had engaged with the club and had been informed that the reports would be removed. The offending match reports were not removed.

d) On 23 October 2024, JW on behalf of EH asked NNHC to remove the offending material, failing which a Misconduct Complaint would be filed.

e) By an email dated 24 October 2025, Mr Morris expressed surprise that EH were getting involved but stated that the committee of NNHC were to meet to discuss the issue.

4. The complaint was lodged and served upon NNHC on 28 October 2024, and NNHC were asked to respond by 3 November 2024 (“the Complaint”).

5. On 1 November 2024, NNHC accepted “the charge in part” and said that they would respond in full by 10 November 2024.

6. On 6 November 2024, NNHC submitted a more substantive response to the Complaint, which, inter alia, contained the following:

a) An appreciation that some may find certain parts of the Website offensive.

b) Whether an individual find the Website offensive is wholly subjective.

c) They were entitled to their freedom of choice/speech.

d) They accepted that certain measures could be put in place to protect those who require it; some of the content was not suitable for minors; that the site contained derogatory references to Holcombe hockey club. Therefore, they had set up a pop up warning so that a user has to confirm that he or she is over 18 years of age prior to entering the site. The references to Holcombe hockey club had been removed.

7. The response from NNHC was not accepted by EH.

8. A copy of the following documents were sent by EH to NNHC with the Complaint:

a) The Regulations.

b) Spirit of Hockey, Code of Conduct (“Code of Conduct”).

c) Inappropriate Behaviours poster (“the Poster”).

9. Paragraph 2 of the Regulations define what constitutes “Misconduct” as follows (the underlined parts are our emphasis):

“Misconduct

2.1 A Participant or a Member may be guilty of Misconduct in accordance with these Disciplinary Regulations if they:

2.1.1 commit a breach of any of these Disciplinary Regulations, the Rules of the Game or any EH Code of Conduct, regulation or policy;

2.1.2 commit any breach of a provision of the Memorandum of Association or the Articles of Association (EH or Area), County (Sub-Area) Constitution; any other resolution or determination of the Board or any committee of EH;

2.1.3  engage in conduct, which is prejudicial to the interests of, or harms or may harm, the reputation of the Sport [which is improper conduct];

2.1.4 engage in the use of dissent and/ or otherwise unacceptable language and/or behaviour;

2.1.5 fail within any time allowed (or fail at all) to assist an investigation by EH or a Panel;

2.1.6 fail to satisfy or otherwise comply with any Decision made or Sanction imposed pursuant to these Disciplinary Regulations;

2.1.7 engage in conduct which is otherwise inappropriate, incorrect, improper, unlawful or unsporting, or discriminatory;

2.1.8 bring the Sport or other Participants or Members into disrepute or engage in conduct which is contrary to the standards of behaviour or conduct expected.

2.2 Misconduct can take the form of a single act or omission, a series of acts or omissions, or a course of conduct or behaviour.”

10. Regulation 2.11 expressly incorporates any EH Code of Conduct, regulation, or policy.

11. Regulation 3 sets out the jurisdiction and power to raise and deal with a complaint: “3. JURISDICTION AND POWER

3.1 The Board delegates to EH, or any body or individual instructed by EH in accordance with these Disciplinary Regulations, the full power and jurisdiction to act in relation to all Red Card Offences, Misconduct Complaints and Disciplinary Cases, including the power to impose Sanctions, and take such action as it sees fit, in accordance with these Disciplinary Regulations.

3.2 This power and jurisdiction is delegated by the Board and shall be in respect of, and in relation to, all current Participants (or individuals who were Participants at the time the Red Card was issued or alleged Misconduct occurred).

3.3 The conduct of any Hearings held under these Disciplinary Regulations shall be determined at the discretion of the relevant Chair, as appointed by the Disciplinary Lead.”

12.  The Disciplinary Panel Procedure is set out in Regulation 7. This panel has been appointed to deal with the Complaint pursuant to Regulation 7.5. The members of the panel (“Panel”) are:

a) Avtar Khangure KC (Chair);

b) Justine Fosh; and

c) Markas Marriott

13. The burden of proof in misconduct cases is set out at Regulation 9.1:

“9.1 To find a Participant or Member guilty of Misconduct, the Disciplinary Panel must be satisfied that the Misconduct has occurred. This standard of proof in all Misconduct cases shall be on the balance of probabilities, i.e. more likely than not to have happened.”

14. Neither party to the Complaint has requested an oral hearing, therefore we proceed to determine the Complaint by reference to the written submissions of both parties.

15.  As stated, Regulation 2.1.1 incorporates any EH Code of Conduct, regulation, or policy. The Code expressly states:

a) “Hockey prides itself on fostering an open and welcoming community for individuals from all backgrounds, ensuring that everyone who wants to experience hockey can be involved, feel valued, and be safe. England

Hockey is dedicated to promoting and protecting the welfare of all

participants, urging everyone to consistently uphold and promote the values and integrity of our sport.”

b) “By adhering to this code and embracing these values, we demonstrate the behaviours expected of participants within the game.”

c) “Hockey is a sport rooted in inclusivity, mutual support, and respect, where passion fuels participation and challenges are met with resilience.”

d) “By embracing and adhering to this code, we maintain the sport's reputation, support its goals and enrich its culture.”

e) “Uphold honesty, kindness, and integrity in all our behaviours, whether on the pitch or off it”.

f) “Actively promote the reputation of the sport and serve as ambassadors for hockey.”

16. Further, as part of the Code, the Poster, sets out examples of inappropriate behaviour which may not meet the expected minimum standard of the sport. These include:

a) Using inappropriate, insulting, foul, or discriminatory language or gestures during any hockey-related activities.

b) Endorsing or displaying behaviour that contradicts the values and policies of England Hockey.

c) Making insulting or inappropriate statements or comments about England Hockey or any other person or organisation covered under this Code of Conduct.

d) Using involvement in hockey to promote beliefs or behaviours that conflict with those of England Hockey.

e) Engaging in any form of sexually inappropriate or unwanted behaviour, including innuendo, flirting, or gestures, whether in person or electronically at any age.

17. As noted above, the Complaint was lodged and served on NNHC on 28 October 2024. The main complaints are as follows:

a) It is the view of EH that NNHC’s match reports, as appearing on an open Website, are a clear breach of the Code.

b) Examples of the type of offending material was set out in the Complaint:

i. “My son was thrown out of school today for letting a girl in his class **** him off. “I said son that's three schools this year. Maybe teaching isn't for you.”   

ii. “Finn Piper was a proper handful (Well that's what his b******g h*********r said) scored the first two, then McGoon and Orpin Finished off two other cracking moves.”

iii. References to “Holcombe H**d-*ns.” (This has since been taken down).

iv. Smith you're on crime scene. Jones interviewing victims, Perkins you’re di**o counting. F**k that I didn't join f***ing vice for this.”

v. “… he popped up in more places than M********d A* F***d at the Harrods Christmas Party.”

vi. Let's hope next week's match with Gillingham is easier than a game of Scrabble with Ha**y P***e.”

vii. “I haven't seen balls crashing into a box like that since G**y G*****r heard the closing bell at his local l**y b*y c**b.”

18. In addition to the examples given above in the Complaint, the Panel have had the opportunity to visit the Website and note that there are numerous other examples of references to:

a) Sexual inferences, including paedophilia, well known individuals prosecuted for sexual offences and interactions between players for example:

“…all the touches of a d*****n p***t at a choirboy’s confession box …”

“…the return of M B who spent the whole time haranguing and manhandling the y******r members of the opposition. I heard one of the oppo say they are considering reopening operation Y*w T**e on the back of it.”

b) Misogynistic comments: ‘snog that fit bird’

c) Misguided comments about disability:

“… I haven’t seen that many missed shots since A******a B******i was invited on the annual grouse shoot…”   

d) References to players continuing to play despite injuries including concussion and teeth being broken as if that should be the norm.

“Bates who was clearly concussed after the collision, saving the flick. He was so out of it he didn’t realise he had made the save; he thought they had scored. Head injuries smead injuries people make so much fuss of them these days.”

e) Complicity and encouragement to potential underage drinking taking place:

“… we all went back to the pub and enjoyed a cracking shepherd’s pie and a few pints- well all of us that hadn’t forgotten to bring their fake ID’s – come on boys.”

19. By their email dated 6 November 2024, NNHC put forward their reasoning as to why

(a) they did not consider that they were in breach of the Regulations and the Code, and

(b) why they would not be taking down the offending material on the Website.

20. NNHC’s reasoning is as follows:

a) The reports were intended to be humorous, but they appreciate that some may find certain parts offensive.

b) As individuals, what offends us is wholly subjective.

c) They have a freedom of choice as to what appears on the Website.

d) That it is impossible to police modern media and that offensive material is readily accessible across all forms of media.

21. It is for EH, as the complainant, to prove the Complaint on a balance of probabilities.

22. NNHC are a participant as defined in the Regulations:

“means any person, whether or not a member of EH, who from time to time engages in the Sport in any capacity whether directly or indirectly, including, but not limited to, a player, coach, manager, physiotherapist, doctor, videographer, any other Club or Team official, umpire or technical official. For the purpose of these rules supporters and volunteers will fall within the definition of participant;”

23. Regulations 1.2 and 1.3provide:

“1.2

The overriding purpose of these Disciplinary Regulations is to maintain and promote fair play, to protect the welfare of Participants and to ensure that acts of on-field and off-field misconduct are dealt with expeditiously, fairly and by consistent and uniform means.

1.3

These Disciplinary Regulations are made pursuant to the powers of EH to act as the governing body protecting the Sport in England, as set out in the Articles of Association. They apply to all Participants.”

24. As stated above, the Regulations incorporate the Code.

25. The Website is accessible to all. Although a pop up warning has now been set up, it offers no real protection in that anybody, including minors can access the sight and the offending material.

26. As a club associated with and participating in EH’s league programmes, NNHC are bound to abide with the Regulations and the Code.

27. We have looked at the contents of the Website objectively. We also note that the initial complaints regarding the Website were made by other clubs and not EH.

28. In our opinion, NNHC has breached the Regulations and the Code and is guilty of misconduct.

29. The Website is in breach of the Regulations in that it continues to contain material which has inappropriate references to:

a) Paedophilia;

b) Sexual harassment;

c) Pictures of P-Diddy, Philip Scofield, Gary Glitter, Huw Edwards, and Harvey Price which are in the context, unnecessary, offensive, and vulgar.

d) Disability; and

e) Underage drinking of alcohol.

30. The Website contravenes the very essence and spirit of the Code. The Website:

a) Fails to treat people with respect;

b) Displays behaviour not expected by participants in the sport of hockey;

c) Fails to encourage inclusivity, or treat each other with respect;

d) Fails to create a welcoming environment regardless of background, ability, or identity;

e) Fails to set a positive example for others;

f) Fails to uphold honesty, kindness, and integrity in all our behaviours, whether on the pitch or off it;

g) Fails to promote the reputation of the sport and serve as ambassadors for hockey.

31.  Whilst we live in a society that promotes freedom of speech, that is not a licence to use language that is deliberately derogatory, hurtful, exclusionary, divisive, offensive, or vulgar.

32. NNHC have been given the opportunity to remove the offensive material from the Website, and after showing initial signs of agreeing to do so, have now refused such requests. This in our opinion is an aggravating feature. It demonstrates a belligerent attitude to a reasonable request. The mind set of those responsible for the offensive material on the Website appears to be that it is their Website and for them to decide what is acceptable or not acceptable. They chose to ignore the Regulations, the Code, and the overall spirit of the game of hockey that EH is trying to promote.

33. They are free to continue such behaviour, if that is what they chose to do, outside of any association with EH. If they chose to participate in the sport in association with EH, they are bound to comply with the Regulations and code.

34.  We remind ourselves of the provisions of Regulation 11, which provide that any sanction imposed must not be unreasonable or disproportionate in all the circumstances.

35. We have considered all our options under the regulations, and in the unusual circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that the only effective option for us is to suspend NNHC from any hockey activity until the offending material on the website has been removed. NNHC should further desist from allowing any further offending material being put on the Website.

36. Regulation 11.2.5 provides for

“a partial or full suspension (interim or temporary) from involvement in Matches or otherwise from involvement in the Sport (or parts of the Sport) at any level for a specified period of time…”

37. We consider that a further opportunity ought to be given to NNHC to voluntarily remove any offending material from the Website before the suspension becomes operative. We consider that 7 days from the handing down of this decision is a sufficient period to carry out this task.

38. If NNHC fail to remove the offending material from the Website within 28 days of the suspension becoming operative, the Panel shall refer the matter to the EH Board to review and thereafter authorise and/or endorse the permanent removal of NNHC from the Sport, pursuant to Regulation 11.9.

39. We remind NNHC of their right to appeal our findings pursuant to Regulation 13.

Justine Fosh Markas Marriott

Dated this the 20th day of January 2024