![Referee Richard Parker issues a red card to Wanderers prop Willie Leoso, right. who is beside captain Piers Morell. Picture by Matt Mockovic Referee Richard Parker issues a red card to Wanderers prop Willie Leoso, right. who is beside captain Piers Morell. Picture by Matt Mockovic](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/AVQVfAtGgzehhK8J9F6uCU/7339f8ee-0be2-4a3f-863e-0043aee3c3d1.jpg/r13_13_2000_960_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
WANDERERS prop Willie Leoso has been banned until at least the start of the 2026 season for using threatening words towards referee Richard Parker.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Wanderers were notified of the suspension on Friday, two days after the judiciary hearing, and have lodged an appeal with Hunter Rugby Appeals Committee.
Leoso was sent off in the second half of the Two Blues' 46-19 loss to Maitland at No.2 Sportsground on July 6 and charged with dissent - 'a player must not use threatening actions or words towards match officials'.
The incident occurred in the 65th minute after Maitland were awarded a scrum penalty.
Wanderers contested that Leoso's comments - "I'll see you in the car park" - were directed at Maitland tighthead prop Harry Chapman.
However, the judiciary found Leoso guilty and deemed the offence at mid-range level which has a sanction of 24 matches.
"Our players are adamant that Willie was speaking to Maitland prop Harry Chapman," Wanderers coach Trevor Hefren said.
"It was a stupid thing to say.
"We don't condone what he said, but he wasn't saying it to the referee."
Leoso works remotely in special high-needs nursing and was unable to attend the judiciary hearing which had been postponed twice.
He was represented by the club.
BarTV Sports captured footage of the incident but there was no audio available.
Parker submitted a referee's report.
Wanderers submitted statements from four of their players, including captain Piers Morell, who was in close proximity to Leoso and the referee when the alleged offence occurred.
The club also maintain the referee's report was not consistent with the video footage of the incident.
The judiciary panel requested an extra day to review the case before delivering the outcome.