Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 12:31 pm  

Does that mean no Williams and Vaughan for opening game/games of next season or do friendlies count..and what a shambles this disciplinary panel are..

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 12:39 pm  

sir adrian morley wrote:

Does that mean no Williams and Vaughan for opening game/games of next season or do friendlies count..and what a shambles this disciplinary panel are..

There is Philbin’s testimonial game(s) and test matches too.

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 12:50 pm  

Douglas Black wrote:

So, the Williams nothing shoulder charge is deemed worse than Walmsley's that led to an HIA and Bullock's that did end up with head contact? Laughable indeed.

And Drinkwater didn't put their player in a dangerous position so that shouldn't have been a penalty. Thanks for nothing.

Williams' tackle was worse than Walmsley's, 100%, at least he made a challenge. Walmsley didn't do anything. He went in to tackle and Crowther was tackled into him and gently smeared down his front. About as impactful as a cuddle from a drunken auntie and absolutely no force put into it by Walmsley. It was farcical that it was even given as a penalty and I'm sure it wouldn't had Crowther not stayed down and milked it for all it's worth.

I'm delighted because they missed the worst tackle of the game completely and it wasn't even cited

The charges from the game were a good example of how much the MRP is overstepping the mark. There was nothing in that game the referee didn't deal with properly and there was nothing worthy of one of the stars of the game missing matches for. The MRP should be there to grade red cards and pick up serious incidents the officials misjudged or didn't see at all. This forensic analysis of games to search for players to ban has to stop, it has to be reined in.

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 1:15 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

The MRP should be there to grade red cards and pick up serious incidents the officials misjudged or didn't see at all. This forensic analysis of games to search for players to ban has to stop, it has to be reined in.

That's exactly how I feel about it too. The current way of doing it is turning so many people off the game.

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 1:29 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Williams' tackle was worse than Walmsley's, 100%, at least he made a challenge. Walmsley didn't do anything. He went in to tackle and Crowther was tackled into him and gently smeared down his front. About as impactful as a cuddle from a drunken auntie and absolutely no force put into it by Walmsley. It was farcical that it was even given as a penalty and I'm sure it wouldn't had Crowther not stayed down and milked it for all it's worth.

I'm delighted because they missed the worst tackle of the game completely and it wasn't even cited

The charges from the game were a good example of how much the MRP is overstepping the mark. There was nothing in that game the referee didn't deal with properly and there was nothing worthy of one of the stars of the game missing matches for. The MRP should be there to grade red cards and pick up serious incidents the officials misjudged or didn't see at all. This forensic analysis of games to search for players to ban has to stop, it has to be reined in.

This post reads like you forgot which alter ego you were posting under. You at least usually try to be subtle in your bias. You're saying Walmsley went into that tackle.... not trying to make a tackle? Which would require putting a shoulder in. Its unfortunate that Crowther was falling but that rotund giraffe definitely put his shoulder into Crowthers face even if it was a clumsy shot. If Williams deserves a ban for essentially stiffening his shoulder due to incoming contact, then Walmsley deserves a match for causing a HIA check. Crowther is not savvy enough to play for that.

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 1:29 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Williams' tackle was worse than Walmsley's, 100%, at least he made a challenge. Walmsley didn't do anything. He went in to tackle and Crowther was tackled into him and gently smeared down his front. About as impactful as a cuddle from a drunken auntie and absolutely no force put into it by Walmsley. It was farcical that it was even given as a penalty and I'm sure it wouldn't had Crowther not stayed down and milked it for all it's worth.

I'm delighted because they missed the worst tackle of the game completely and it wasn't even cited

The charges from the game were a good example of how much the MRP is overstepping the mark. There was nothing in that game the referee didn't deal with properly and there was nothing worthy of one of the stars of the game missing matches for. The MRP should be there to grade red cards and pick up serious incidents the officials misjudged or didn't see at all. This forensic analysis of games to search for players to ban has to stop, it has to be reined in.

Jeez, you're so predictable

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 1:33 pm  

sir adrian morley wrote:

Does that mean no Williams and Vaughan for opening game/games of next season or do friendlies count..and what a shambles this disciplinary panel are..

Williams' suspension will mean he misses the first test match vs Tonga - assuming he doesn't appeal - so no impact on his start to next year. Vaughan has missed two games so far, Philbin testimonial will be another, so as it stands he will be missing from game one 2024, unless the club organise another friendly the week before Philbins testimonial, or if the RFL change the rules around using friendlies / reserve fixtures as a way to escape bans

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 2:21 pm  

Man, I'm often so tempted so hit 'Ignore' on the Sad One, but it's all just so comical at the same time I can't resist a read!

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 2:25 pm  

WireWireWire wrote:

This post reads like you forgot which alter ego you were posting under. You at least usually try to be subtle in your bias. You're saying Walmsley went into that tackle.... not trying to make a tackle? Which would require putting a shoulder in. Its unfortunate that Crowther was falling but that rotund giraffe definitely put his shoulder into Crowthers face even if it was a clumsy shot. If Williams deserves a ban for essentially stiffening his shoulder due to incoming contact, then Walmsley deserves a match for causing a HIA check. Crowther is not savvy enough to play for that.

It's the complete lack of any impact from Walmsley. He's just there and collected him. Compare the force of the Bullock one (Also shouldn't have been a charge) and the Walmsley one. There is a drastic difference.If he's flown in and given Crowther a proper smack with force, yeah ban him. But he just didn't.

But this just reinforces my point about the MRP. There was absolutely nothing in that tackle, yet because of the nonsense that has gone on throughout the year, your fans and fans of a lot of other clubs are hopeful of a ban there to diminish our chances and some out and out crying about it. If we didn't have the MRP pulling ridiculous charges out every week (Like the Williams one) we wouldn't have this desperate frenzy for everything to be a ban and we'd just get on with it. Everyone can tell a genuinely dangerous challenge from something that is just a penalty, yet we're here squabbling about something as minor as that?

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Mon Oct 02, 2023 2:27 pm  

matt_wire wrote:

Man, I'm often so tempted so hit 'Ignore' on the Sad One, but it's all just so comical at the same time I can't resist a read!

So you think the Walmsley 'tackle' if we can call it that, was a bad one? You think it was worthy of a ban? Or are you just frustrated that an opportunity to weaken our chances has been missed?