Re: Disciplinary Charges : Tue Jun 17, 2014 9:18 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

Who hates him???

It was one, probably throw away comment, more about Greenwood coming back than Manu.

If I had said Greenwood was dropped for Wellens the comment replying to me could have been the same.

Why not drop the pudding for Thompson or Saveilo or Richards or walker?

Surely 11 hit ups in two games and no one on one tackles must warrant being dropped ?

Re: Disciplinary Charges : Tue Jun 17, 2014 9:19 pm  

How did a thread about Roby and walmsley being up before the beak become about masoe and Manu?

Re: Disciplinary Charges : Tue Jun 17, 2014 10:01 pm  

A question was asked about why was Greenwood not playing in Catalan. I answered suggesting with Manu available that it was likely he was stood down for that game.

Then it all went big bannana with some very heavy reading between the lines into a hatred of Manu to be forced out the team.

Re: Disciplinary Charges : Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:47 am  

dubairl wrote:

I Cant really remember the incident, but i could understand being found guilty of a grade a offence and just paying a fine but i thought grade B is a minimum of 1 game or have i made that up?

2.8 SENTENCING GUIDELINES FOR EACH GRADE OF OFFENCE

GRADE NORMAL SUSPENSION
RANGE
A NFA -1
B 1 – 2
C 2 -3
D 3-5
E 4-8
F 8+ or period suspension


2.9 NORMAL SUSPENSION RANGES – GUIDELINES ONLY

Players and Clubs should be aware that the normal suspension ranges are guidelines only and the
Tribunal has the discretion to step outside of the normal ranges in the following three
circumstances:

- If the Compliance Manager has advised the Player that, in the light of specified aggravating
factors, he is going to seek a higher sanction and the Tribunal agree that such factors mean a
higher sanction should be imposed;
- If the Tribunal has previously advised the Player that it will apply a higher sanction next time
that Player is found to have committed a misconduct Offence; or
- If the Tribunal feels that in the light of the aggravating and mitigating factors present it is
appropriate to step outside of the normal suspension range (irrespective of whether this has
been requested by the Compliance Manager).


Guidelines only according to RFL website.

Re: Disciplinary Charges : Wed Jun 18, 2014 9:04 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

A question was asked about why was Greenwood not playing in Catalan. I answered suggesting with Manu available that it was likely he was stood down for that game.

Then it all went big bannana with some very heavy reading between the lines into a hatred of Manu to be forced out the team.

Hatred was perhaps too strong a word to use.

However Manu certainly is lacking in love on these boards, and has been since signing for us.

The comment wasn't particularly aimed at this thread, but a general pattern in which the likes of Flanagan and Soliola are lauded, while Wilkin and Manu are degraded.

Similarly LMS comes in for loads of stick by a wide number of people, yet when it comes to Masoe there is only Pete and one or two others criticizing his performances. The rest all come across as being in awe of his one decent run a game.

Re: Disciplinary Charges : Wed Jun 18, 2014 9:17 am  

Arthur Warrior wrote:

2.8 SENTENCING GUIDELINES FOR EACH GRADE OF OFFENCE

GRADE NORMAL SUSPENSION
RANGE
A NFA -1
B 1 – 2
C 2 -3
D 3-5
E 4-8
F 8+ or period suspension


2.9 NORMAL SUSPENSION RANGES – GUIDELINES ONLY

Players and Clubs should be aware that the normal suspension ranges are guidelines only and the
Tribunal has the discretion to step outside of the normal ranges in the following three
circumstances:

- If the Compliance Manager has advised the Player that, in the light of specified aggravating
factors, he is going to seek a higher sanction and the Tribunal agree that such factors mean a
higher sanction should be imposed;
- If the Tribunal has previously advised the Player that it will apply a higher sanction next time
that Player is found to have committed a misconduct Offence; or
- If the Tribunal feels that in the light of the aggravating and mitigating factors present it is
appropriate to step outside of the normal suspension range (irrespective of whether this has
been requested by the Compliance Manager).


Guidelines only according to RFL website.

Good to see they have a get out clause of being consistent, Thanks for explaining it better.

Re: Disciplinary Charges : Wed Jun 18, 2014 9:20 am  

St pete wrote:

How can walmsley get a ban and peacock not?

The Leigh guy who started it with peacock didn't even get charged!

Oh for gods sake, did you really need to ask that question? you can not look at what was reported and see for yourself?

Incidents are not the same no matter how anyone want's to portray them. And records are not the same, regardless of what fantasy people live in.

It's funny how you compare the Walmsley one, because he got banned, but don't mention the Roby one, which went without ban for the same reasons as Peacock.

Re: Disciplinary Charges : Wed Jun 18, 2014 9:38 am  

The problem with this season is us fans just can't seem to decide on who the scapegoat is. I thought it was developing into LMS but then people keep derailing it to other players. Come on posters, pick a scapegoat and stick with it. This is confusing the team when nobody knows who the scapegoat is to pile all the blame onto.

Re: Disciplinary Charges : Wed Jun 18, 2014 12:08 pm  

Donkey OTay wrote:

The problem with this season is us fans just can't seem to decide on who the scapegoat is. I thought it was developing into LMS but then people keep derailing it to other players. Come on posters, pick a scapegoat and stick with it. This is confusing the team when nobody knows who the scapegoat is to pile all the blame onto.

Don't you think that several names have been picked out for poor performances actually states the obvious? The whole team except the odd player are playing poor.

My point is, why can LMS, Turner, wello, flash etc yet the big pudding doesn't?

Someone said drop Manu next week because he was poor, he's been out 8 weeks yet the pudding still getting away with doing nothing over half eat through the season.

Re: Disciplinary Charges : Wed Jun 18, 2014 12:40 pm  

I think there is a growing obsession of certain fans on here who are over critical,
Fan A = LMS, Fan B = Wello, Fan C = Wilkin, Fan D = Mose, Fan E = Brown. You all know who you are, its OK having an opinion but the repetiveness is turning into a bitch feast something similarly to VT.
Players have good, bad, average performances over varying periods of time, sometimes players are tactically not used efficiently in a game, some play with injuries.
A true fan will support the saints shirt and whoever wears it at the time, most fans make there point without having to repetively force there opinion on others...........otherwise its boring.