NRL: Zillman banned for biting

Gold Coast fullback William Zillman was found guilty of biting South Sydney's Jamie Simpson. Photo / Getty Images

SYDNEY - Gold Coast fullback William Zillman has been found guilty of biting at the NRL judiciary on Wednesday night and banned for four games.

Zillman failed to clear himself of the dangerous contact charge at the judiciary hearing where the three-man panel of Mark Coyne, Bob Lindner and Sean Garlick found him guilty of biting South Sydney's Jamie Simpson last Friday.

The suspension rules Zillman out of action until the second week of the NRL finals series.

Zillman did not deny that Simpson's forearm came into contact with his mouth, but told the judiciary that he pulled his head away once he realised the position he was in and did not at any stage clamp down with his jaw.

"What happened was as soon as I turned my head I realised the position I was in and I could feel his arm in my mouth," said Zillman.

"As quickly as I could I turned my head back to where it came from with my mouth still open.

"You can see in the video, I did not move my head down onto his arm or anything like that."

The panel viewed two angles of television footage of the incident, plus they received written reports from referees Tony Archer, Gerard Sutton, touch judge Chris James and Simpson.

South Sydney also provided the NRL with video footage of the bite marks taken at half time, as well as photographs.

On-field audio was also presented as evidence with the vision and Simpson could be clearly heard yell at the point of contact "F**k, he bit me. He just bit me."

Zillman's defence counsel Geoff Bellew argued that the Titans fullback had no control of his head during the tackle as Simpson had him clenched around the face in the tackle.

He claimed Simpson jumped to the conclusion he was bitten simply because downward force was applied to Zillman's head when his "relaxed" open mouth was against the Rabbitohs winger's forearm.

"I'm not calling Mr Simpson a liar, I'm not attacking his credibility but in the moment people jump to conclusions when no other conclusion is available," said Bellew.

"You did not see at any stage of this tackle William Zillman's jaw move in any way consistent with a biting action.

"It did not happen, there is simply no biting action.

"If he wanted to inflict an intentional bite on someone at that point there was the perfect opportunity for him to do it."

- AAP