Biting is like eye gouging or squirrel gripping.
All equally the lowest acts you can commit on a footy field but all are completely swept under the rug by the match review committee unless there is an embarrassing amount of proof.
There was no bite. Graham rubbed his face over his mouth, and would have felt some contact with teeth/mouthguard. There was no mark on Grahams face. Nothing in it.
Do you propose that Nofoaluma be cited on the basis of Graham's allegation alone? Unless there is a bite mark or video footage to substantiate his allegation, no action should be taken.
Not just in reference to this one, but why do players make an on-field allegation, and then refuse to make a complaint after the game? And why should a post game complaint be required anyway? Either don't say anything at all, or follow it all the way through.