Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Tue Jul 25, 2023 8:37 pm  

Budgiezilla wrote:

Say's who exactly, 'cry baby' Wellens ?

p.s. I hope it isn't over but I've read this nowhere.

Quite a few people have I was told this on Sunday

Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Tue Jul 25, 2023 8:44 pm  

thesaint71 wrote:

Only way it was different was that Knowles got 2 extra games for ending Coopers season

Not quite.

One was a tackle against the rules of the game and one wasn't.

Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Tue Jul 25, 2023 9:22 pm  

Didn't realise there is a time limit on nonsense.paasi targeted the knee of a player being held by two defenders.asiata made a tackle on a moving player.

Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Wed Jul 26, 2023 7:29 am  

thesaint71 wrote:

Quite a few people have I was told this on Sunday

Based on what medical evidence - Wilkin's 10-year training to become an orthopaedic surgeon?

Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Wed Jul 26, 2023 7:43 am  

Saddened! wrote:

The trolling on here is so bad. If you're going to throw nonsense like that in, at least make it somewhat relevant to something.

Trolling? I'm merely highlighting the fact that Saints are the masters of the grubby tackle yet you're all now out in force crying about it. I haven't seen the tackle back as I'm in Spain before heading over to watch Catalans on Saturday (just thought I'd drop that in there ) but Saints fans have no right to cry about being hard done by.

Whingeing Scousers with the old self-pity city attitude.

Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Wed Jul 26, 2023 7:53 am  

Egg Chasing wrote:

Not quite.

One was a tackle against the rules of the game and one wasn't.

Really?

Case Number:
ON/355/23

Morgan Knowles #13, St Helens
Competition:
Super League

Match:
Wigan Warriors v St Helens

Match Date:
2023-04-07

Incident:
Dangerous Contact

Decision:
Charge

Charge Detail:
Law 15.1 (i)

Dangerous Contact - Defender uses any part of their body forcefully to twist, bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player.

Grade D

So Defender (Asiata) uses any part of their body (shoulder) to twist bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of any opposing player in a way that involves an unnacceptable risk of injury to that player.


Seems straight forward to me.

Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Wed Jul 26, 2023 7:59 am  

You've just made that Asiata charge up haven't you?

Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Wed Jul 26, 2023 9:38 am  

Saddened! wrote:

It's just not. Where has this idea come from? If you look at the physics involved, throwing his shoulder and all his body weight into the planted knee, opposite the direction he's running from, it can only result in injury. A 'copybook' tackle on the lower legs is where you place your head behind the knees and use your hands to grab the legs, taking the player down using his own momentum, so he falls in the direction he's running. Players aren't taught to drop their body weight and drive their shoulder through the knee joint at all.

If players started tackling like that, there would be horrific consequences. I'm convinced most people on here haven't even seen the tackles, the responses on here are so childish. I understand the Leigh fans being defensive, but I'm not talking about bans here, I've already said it''s not against the current rules. But there's an ethical angle to it, most players wouldn't tackle like that due to how likely it is to cause injury.

It’s not that they haven’t seen it, it’s that they’re physically incapable of objectively looking at incidents for fear of saying something sensible that might be in “benefit” of another club. It’s classic RL fans. They’re the worst sports fans in the world

[Wanderer]

Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Wed Jul 26, 2023 9:40 am  

It strikes me (no pun intended) that it's simply a variation on a cannonball tackle and as such should probably treated the same and outlawed.

Re: Tackles on Paasi and Walmsley : Wed Jul 26, 2023 11:26 am  

Wanderer wrote:

It strikes me (no pun intended) that it's simply a variation on a cannonball tackle and as such should probably treated the same and outlawed.

I don't think anyone is arguing against the outlawing of the cannonball tackle. My understanding is a cannonball is a tackle to the legs of a stationary player, whereas my recollection is that both injured players were moving. It is very difficult to time a tackle to a moving players legs to hit a knee while the leg is only temporarily planted. Which is why I don't think the tackle was malicious. Unless you are banning tackling to the legs, while a player is in motion, what are you proposing?