Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:53 am  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

That picture is a bad angle to make such a decision, you can't see any contact with the head because his head is in the way. O'Brien is on the way down there. I think people re seeing what they want to see with that.

I was screaming for blood at the game, but I've not seen the replay so will reserve judgement, I don't think that the RFL wouldn't have banned him if there was clear contact with the head though, he isn't an important enough player.

Someone with a bit of sense. Point of contact was shoulder to shoulder. Watched in slow motion it looked pretty bad, watched again at full speed I'm not sure he could have pulled out. However it was a shoulder charge which is illegal.

There's a fair few on this thread going OTT. IMO he should have been charged with a grade A as although committed he went in with the shoulder rather than effecting a tackle.

Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 10:12 am  

That photo, to me, looks to be taken immediately after contact which is why O'Briens head is angled backwards (after contact in the back). No doubt it was a dangerous/illegal tackle but, in my limited opinion, it was not a shoulder charge to the head and the damage to the player occurred when his head bounced off the floor

Hope he's back soon for you guys though, you need all the HB help you can get at the moment

Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 10:41 am  

Take a look at the Gardner decision: http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4355 'Dangerous shoulder charge' - is this not dangerous? I think it was. The RFL are basically allowing forwards to take out smaller ball players with this decision. I thought at the match it was a cowardly tackle and seeing the replay it looked that way, 100%. If Wigan fans are ok with their players using such tactics, then fair enough. But you were all moaning about Blake green being taken out when he took the ball to the line in the Hull KR game.

Take a look at the Gardner decision: http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4355 'Dangerous shoulder charge' - is this not dangerous? I think it was. The RFL are basically allowing forwards to take out smaller ball players with this decision. I thought at the match it was a cowardly tackle and seeing the replay it looked that way, 100%. If Wigan fans are ok with their players using such tactics, then fair enough. But you were all moaning about Blake green being taken out when he took the ball to the line in the Hull KR game.

Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 10:50 am  

Albion wrote: Take a look at the Gardner decision: http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4355 'Dangerous shoulder charge' - is this not dangerous? I think it was. The RFL are basically allowing forwards to take out smaller ball players with this decision. I thought at the match it was a cowardly tackle and seeing the replay it looked that way, 100%. If Wigan fans are ok with their players using such tactics, then fair enough. But you were all moaning about Blake green being taken out when he took the ball to the line in the Hull KR game. [Gareth] wrote: No doubt it was a dangerous/illegal tackle For me it was a 1 game ban and hes been lucky to have been let off

Albion wrote: Take a look at the Gardner decision: http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4355 'Dangerous shoulder charge' - is this not dangerous? I think it was. The RFL are basically allowing forwards to take out smaller ball players with this decision. I thought at the match it was a cowardly tackle and seeing the replay it looked that way, 100%. If Wigan fans are ok with their players using such tactics, then fair enough. But you were all moaning about Blake green being taken out when he took the ball to the line in the Hull KR game. [Gareth] wrote: No doubt it was a dangerous/illegal tackle For me it was a 1 game ban and hes been lucky to have been let off

Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:09 am  

Albion wrote: Take a look at the Gardner decision: http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4355 'Dangerous shoulder charge' - is this not dangerous? I think it was. The RFL are basically allowing forwards to take out smaller ball players with this decision. I thought at the match it was a cowardly tackle and seeing the replay it looked that way, 100%. If Wigan fans are ok with their players using such tactics, then fair enough. But you were all moaning about Blake green being taken out when he took the ball to the line in the Hull KR game. Yes we were, but can you not see the differences. 1) We never got a penalty. 2) It wasn't put on report. 3) When the review committee looked at the incident, the HKR player (Cory Paterson) was brought up before the disciplinary and given a four match ban.

Albion wrote: Take a look at the Gardner decision: http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4355 'Dangerous shoulder charge' - is this not dangerous? I think it was. The RFL are basically allowing forwards to take out smaller ball players with this decision. I thought at the match it was a cowardly tackle and seeing the replay it looked that way, 100%. If Wigan fans are ok with their players using such tactics, then fair enough. But you were all moaning about Blake green being taken out when he took the ball to the line in the Hull KR game. Yes we were, but can you not see the differences. 1) We never got a penalty. 2) It wasn't put on report. 3) When the review committee looked at the incident, the HKR player (Cory Paterson) was brought up before the disciplinary and given a four match ban.

Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:31 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote: Yes we were, but can you not see the differences. 1) We never got a penalty. 2) It wasn't put on report. 3) When the review committee looked at the incident, the HKR player (Cory Paterson) was brought up before the disciplinary and given a four match ban. You forgot the biggest difference, he plays for Wigan. Terry Newton got away with dirty late tackles for years and the disciplinary just ignored it when others seemed to get pulled up over little to nothing. The Judiciary are as poor and inconsistent as the referee's Not the first time it's been questioned either http://m.rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.ph ... 6&start=15

Rogues Gallery wrote: Yes we were, but can you not see the differences. 1) We never got a penalty. 2) It wasn't put on report. 3) When the review committee looked at the incident, the HKR player (Cory Paterson) was brought up before the disciplinary and given a four match ban. You forgot the biggest difference, he plays for Wigan. Terry Newton got away with dirty late tackles for years and the disciplinary just ignored it when others seemed to get pulled up over little to nothing. The Judiciary are as poor and inconsistent as the referee's Not the first time it's been questioned either http://m.rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.ph ... 6&start=15

Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:48 pm  

No1 Saint wrote: You forgot the biggest difference, he plays for Wigan. Terry Newton got away with dirty late tackles for years and the disciplinary just ignored it when others seemed to get pulled up over little to nothing. The Judiciary are as poor and inconsistent as the referee's Not the first time it's been questioned either http://m.rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.ph ... 6&start=15 So, the referees are wrong, the review panels are wrong and the disciplinary panel are wrong?

No1 Saint wrote: You forgot the biggest difference, he plays for Wigan. Terry Newton got away with dirty late tackles for years and the disciplinary just ignored it when others seemed to get pulled up over little to nothing. The Judiciary are as poor and inconsistent as the referee's Not the first time it's been questioned either http://m.rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.ph ... 6&start=15 So, the referees are wrong, the review panels are wrong and the disciplinary panel are wrong?

Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:53 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

So, the referees are wrong, the review panels are wrong and the disciplinary panel are wrong?

Sometimes yes. Inconsistent may be a better term.

Did they get the pie eaters off the panel or are they still there dazzling us with there impartiality?? I remember the Kung fu Aspinwall incident mentioned in that well - another example of either staggering bias or stupidity

Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:47 pm  

EHW wrote: the tackle wasnt completed. Had Tomkins played the ball, he would have been penalised anyway for playing the ball before he was tackled. The tackle seemed complete to me. You can see that Walmsley never lets go of Logan's shirt. Wouldn't you agree?

EHW wrote: the tackle wasnt completed. Had Tomkins played the ball, he would have been penalised anyway for playing the ball before he was tackled. The tackle seemed complete to me. You can see that Walmsley never lets go of Logan's shirt. Wouldn't you agree?

Re: When is a red card not a red card? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:49 pm  

TheElectricGlidingWarrior wrote: The tackle seemed complete to me. You can see that Walmsley never lets go of Logan's shirt. Wouldn't you agree? Tackle wasn't complete simple as. In any event it is a bit much comparing that with Taylor's illegal "tackle". Even the ape brought him off just after or was that just a co-incidence.

TheElectricGlidingWarrior wrote: The tackle seemed complete to me. You can see that Walmsley never lets go of Logan's shirt. Wouldn't you agree? Tackle wasn't complete simple as. In any event it is a bit much comparing that with Taylor's illegal "tackle". Even the ape brought him off just after or was that just a co-incidence.