Re: That challenge : Sun Apr 15, 2012 10:21 pm  

castigersdave wrote:

as unproffesional as your 4 portaloos for 1000 fans?

If you'd behave yourselves you could have used to proper toilets.

Re: That challenge : Sun Apr 15, 2012 11:03 pm  

Gronk! wrote:

Robinson is not a sponsor, he's a big headed self-publicist who just happens to own a few shares.

Everything he says needs to be taken lightly because it's only to bash Richard Wright, and he's often proven wrong on all matters RW.

Is the same big-headed self-publicist who started a rumour that Wakey players weren't being paid, that you gleefully repeated as proof positive of something amiss at WTW?

Re: That challenge : Sun Apr 15, 2012 11:32 pm  

bren2k wrote:

Is the same big-headed self-publicist who started a rumour that Wakey players weren't being paid, that you gleefully repeated as proof positive of something amiss at WTW?

Your going to have your work cut out on here now with all these fresh Featherstone trolls taking over from the Wakey trolls.

Re: That challenge : Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:09 am  

TigersAllTheWay wrote:

Your going to have your work cut out on here now with all these fresh Featherstone trolls taking over from the Wakey trolls.

Nah - they're just having their well deserved day in the sun; I'll still be here to talk rugby with the few sensible people who haven't been scared off by the foul language and personal insults.

Re: That challenge : Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:19 am  

<image removed>

Dirtiest 'challenge' I've seen for a long while, He appears to jump into it leading with his forearm (regardless of where first contact is, he lifts it into the face). He also looks down smug at what he's done.

AUP wrote:

1.2b. Copyrighted materials
* Linking to sites carrying content without the permission of the copyright owner, or mentioning how to access such material, is forbidden.
* This also includes posting links to, or explaining how to access, unauthorised video or audio of copyrighted broadcasts and recordings.
* When linking to official audio or video, only do so to the relevant page on the official web site. Do not link to other sites or directly to a media stream as this is usually against the terms and conditions of the service.
* Photographs may only be posted where you own the copyright, or have been granted permission to post them.
* Copying full articles or posting video is prohibited.
* When including any such material you must post the source.

Re: That challenge : Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:25 am  

bren2k wrote:

Is the same big-headed self-publicist who started a rumour that Wakey players weren't being paid, that you gleefully repeated as proof positive of something amiss at WTW?

I have heard the same rumour but from an ex-Tiger now at Fev in a managerial role (work that out). Don't know if its right or a load of bull.

Another rumour doing the rounds (and this could be right) is licencing on SL will be abolished, we stay with the current 14 clubs for 2013 and at the end of the 2014 season the bottom two will go down and not be replaced. Hope its wrong - we will see.

Re: That challenge : Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:58 am  

Was a dreadful tackle, sort of can see what he was pretending to do but I do expect a sanction - in the 3-5 games for the grading of the offence.

As for alledged cheap shots and blaming Fev players, it was a great and physical game lots of players skirted the boundaries at times, wish I had been a neutral becuase it represented everything that is a cup competition and why we have them.

We can't sanction people for the outcome of tackles I am afraid, so we can stop arguing about that. The offence is the offence and the sanction belongs looking at that, not the subsequent outcome. There have been arguments in all sports forever that a X player is injured by Y player and X is back from suspension miles before Y player recovers.

Re: That challenge : Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:14 am  

That angle is pretty damning - looks like clear and intentional use of the forearm, resulting in serious injury.

If he did that in the street, he'd be looking at a charge of ABH.

Re: That challenge : Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:22 am  

mdean wrote:

We can't sanction people for the outcome of tackles I am afraid, so we can stop arguing about that.

Wrong.

From Operatrional Rules Section E

In determining the appropriate sanction the Tribunal will take into account all relevant aggravating and mitigating factors (see below).

2.3 AGGRAVATING FACTORS
Previous Record
Violence
Retaliation
Injury caused
Incident not part of play
Other aggravating factors

Re: That challenge : Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:24 am  

Its the worst challenge since Cassidy did Morley in 1998, absoulutely disgusting, the worst bit is that after he does it he looks back at the Fev player with a smug face. Absoulute coward of the highest order. 6 games minimum, if I remember correctly Cassidy got 8.