Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 8:22 pm  

RLBandit wrote:

Oddly enough though, the first, considerably less sinister looking punch, was far more likely to cause a brain injury. The brain typically gets injured bouncing around inside the skull cavity which would happen much more with the first punch and ground impact. The second punch was much more likely to damage the skull itself. All a bit yucky in any event.

Other than being entirely wrong you are correct.

The brain is especially susceptible to damage from a second impact.

Re: Ben Flower : Tue Oct 14, 2014 10:15 pm  

I'm going to take a 4 month break from SuperLeague in protest at the leniency shown.

Re: Ben Flower : Wed Oct 15, 2014 6:37 am  

Cronus wrote:

Swift and stern action from the RFL without paying the slightest bit of attention to the wailing muppets wanting his head, including those on here and in the press.

Or the Wigan fans trying to deflect attention and blame by trying to over state Hohaia's previous involvement in the incident.

Re: Ben Flower : Wed Oct 15, 2014 7:02 am  

The Magic Rat wrote:

Don't know if I am reading the quote you posted wrong but it could be a criticism of Wanes tactics. Stating that Lenegan will look at the cause of the incident and do what is necessary

It could be, but since he says Lenagan will sort it IF he finds anything to sort it is as much a response to the witch hunters and a show of solidarity between the RL community, particularly that they will stand by Wigan, which says to me this is RL's issue and we'll sort it ourselves thank you very much. He could have gone the route of his less than classy coach and stuck the boot in with some bare allegations.

Re: Ben Flower : Wed Oct 15, 2014 7:04 am  

I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand the press by and large seem to have bought into it being reasonable / harsh, Daily Express an exception of those papers I have seen so far. The Christian forgiveness angle from Saints is good too. But, at the end of the day the number of matches banned for is too low. It suggests that player protection is being sacrificed - exactly what would warrant a large ban? I suspect they took into account the fact that it happened right at the start of the match when players are traditionally over-hyped up. Haven't they banned punching in Australia? If so, why not here?

Re: Ben Flower : Wed Oct 15, 2014 7:20 am  

Nah, it's ten games plus any others like internationals and friendlies.

Personally looking at the rules I thought it was an E charge. 4-8. Probably a 7 given his previous record.

But then those 7 I would have expected to be SL games. I think the fact it was the GF tipped it over to a grade F.
Whilst it was a vulgar strike, I would have thought 8 would have placated most Saints fans. Making it 10 games should make most people happy that it's been taken seriously.

Re: Ben Flower : Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:00 am  

Viewing the incident in full real time from above as shown on the bbc website clip you get a different perspective of this than the completely shocking slow motion image starting withFlower stood over Lance punching him in the eye.

The distance Flower gets knocked back, the speed and momentum between the first punch and the second - Flower didn't have time to do an awful lot of thinking between those two punches., he was already in motion with the second straight after the first.

It was bad, very bad, and the images that have been seen by the public are shocking. But it wasn't as bad as the frenzied mob have made out. The ones that have been able to view in slow mo, pore over the image of flower fist cocked over a prone player, looking as though he has taken second to line him up, deliberate and hit him.

He's got a very long ban, a record ban, a rep that will stick with him for the rest of his life, after having a pretty clean record to now.

I'm not really sure what some of the more hysterical posters on here want to do to the guy.

Re: Ben Flower : Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:16 am  

He's had death threats.

Re: Ben Flower : Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:22 am  

Ah, but 'they shouldn't be taken literally', you know, like the 'knock them out, be reckless, cause mayhem' instructions.... Only an idiot would think those sort of comments could be taken literally...

[PopTart]

Re: Ben Flower : Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:24 am  

Big Steve wrote:

Viewing the incident in full real time from above as shown on the bbc website clip you get a different perspective of this than the completely shocking slow motion image starting withFlower stood over Lance punching him in the eye.

The distance Flower gets knocked back, the speed and momentum between the first punch and the second - Flower didn't have time to do an awful lot of thinking between those two punches., he was already in motion with the second straight after the first.

It was bad, very bad, and the images that have been seen by the public are shocking. But it wasn't as bad as the frenzied mob have made out. The ones that have been able to view in slow mo, pore over the image of flower fist cocked over a prone player, looking as though he has taken second to line him up, deliberate and hit him.

He's got a very long ban, a record ban, a rep that will stick with him for the rest of his life, after having a pretty clean record to now.

I'm not really sure what some of the more hysterical posters on here want to do to the guy.

I agree completely
It was bad, he should have stopped before the second punch but he didn't, it was handled. End of.

The death threats are ridiculous and I hope they find them and prosecute them.