Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:40 pm  

Sam Buca wrote:

Under RFL guidelines, they aren't allowed to.

It should be safe for them now though. Kelvin Skerritt retired years ago

Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:40 pm  

Earthworm Jim wrote:

I think Fielden and Griffin have been hard done by. Mason deserves the 3 games, it sends out a message stamping isn't acceptable.

Having watched it back, i think most people would agree the verbals started as a result of the stamp on his ankle, Fielden thought one of the markers was the culprit and was probably telling them what he thought. Griffin was probably wondering what Fielden was moaning about (him not knowing what Mason had done either) he was probably giving it back telling him to stop being soft or words to that affect

I'd imagine with both Fielden and Griffin getting pumped up and giving each other verbals, Fielden probably didn't even notice Mason coming in from the side, but felt the push/shove/punch whatever. I think with Fielden learning the hard way with Willy Mason a few years back on hesitating, he felt the contact, and thought i'm not getting knocked out again and started throwing and starts swinging. By this point Mason has been dragged away and it's all going off.

Mason is the instigator of a situation that would never have occured had he not stamped on Fielden and then jumped into a heated situation between to innocent parties. Mason causes a fight to start and these two lads now serve a ban for it?

Will also be interesting to see how many bans are dished out for fighting in the remaining games of the season?

Spot on.....

Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:53 pm  

Conclusions Mason: The committee give the player credit for admitting the offence. However this is the fourth time that you have appeared before the committee for similar offences and the committee view this seriously. It is clear from the DVD that you stood on Fielden's leg deliberately. The committee are not satisfied that Fielden went to strike your team mate however do note that he acted in an aggressive manner but you did run a considerable distance to get involved and this led to the incident escalating into a brawl. Committee take this type of incident very seriously and feel that a 3 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. Griffin: The committee give you credit for admitting the offence and have noted that you have not appeared before the committee for a similar offence since 2001. You have however received a warning letter in March 2009 for punching. The committee note that you only threw one punch which is reflected in the grading of the charge. It is clear that you threw a punch in retaliation however this is not acceptable from a professional player to retaliate in this manner. Therefore the committee have decided that a 1 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. Fielden: The committee give you credit for admitting the offence and for your good record considering the number of games you have played. The committee are satisfied that there was provocation and that you were in situation where you felt intimidated. However the committee have counted 4 punches thrown and although there is an element of provocation it is clear there is that you have retaliated in this instance. Retaliation is not acceptable. Therefore the committee feel that a 1 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. I can only assume none of them have bothered to appeal because they all pleaded guilty in the first place.

Conclusions Mason: The committee give the player credit for admitting the offence. However this is the fourth time that you have appeared before the committee for similar offences and the committee view this seriously. It is clear from the DVD that you stood on Fielden's leg deliberately. The committee are not satisfied that Fielden went to strike your team mate however do note that he acted in an aggressive manner but you did run a considerable distance to get involved and this led to the incident escalating into a brawl. Committee take this type of incident very seriously and feel that a 3 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. Griffin: The committee give you credit for admitting the offence and have noted that you have not appeared before the committee for a similar offence since 2001. You have however received a warning letter in March 2009 for punching. The committee note that you only threw one punch which is reflected in the grading of the charge. It is clear that you threw a punch in retaliation however this is not acceptable from a professional player to retaliate in this manner. Therefore the committee have decided that a 1 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. Fielden: The committee give you credit for admitting the offence and for your good record considering the number of games you have played. The committee are satisfied that there was provocation and that you were in situation where you felt intimidated. However the committee have counted 4 punches thrown and although there is an element of provocation it is clear there is that you have retaliated in this instance. Retaliation is not acceptable. Therefore the committee feel that a 1 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. I can only assume none of them have bothered to appeal because they all pleaded guilty in the first place.

Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 1:36 pm  

ROBINSON wrote:

It's about right for Fielden. Anyone would be angry abut having their leg stamped on, but contrary to what some are saying, he did not 'defend himself'. It wasn't a sustained attack and therefore there was no reason to defend. What he did, was retaliate to the incident and attack Keith Mason after the incident had happened. Some might argue that he was justified.

Mason should have got eight matches for that stamp. He could have snapped Fielden's leg, it was deliberate and nasty. Three matches is a joke.

Yet Sam Tomkins gets away with a deliberate stamp on Faologo`s hand. He should have been banned also, Just look at the incident at ( 16.37 ) game time.

[Pemps]

Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 1:50 pm  

Giantscorpio wrote:

Yet Sam Tomkins gets away with a deliberate stamp on Faologo`s hand. He should have been banned also, Just look at the incident at ( 16.37 ) game time.

brilliant

Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:33 pm  

Giantscorpio wrote:

Yet Sam Tomkins gets away with a deliberate stamp on Faologo`s hand. He should have been banned also, Just look at the incident at ( 16.37 ) game time.

Talented that Sam! Managing to wrestle with a player leaning back then stand on a players moving hand deliberately!!

Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:34 pm  

I never understand how you get credit for admitting you've done something wrong intentionally.

Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:57 pm  

Bilko wrote: Conclusions Mason: The committee give the player credit for admitting the offence. However this is the fourth time that you have appeared before the committee for similar offences and the committee view this seriously. It is clear from the DVD that you stood on Fielden's leg deliberately. The committee are not satisfied that Fielden went to strike your team mate however do note that he acted in an aggressive manner but you did run a considerable distance to get involved and this led to the incident escalating into a brawl. Committee take this type of incident very seriously and feel that a 3 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. Griffin: The committee give you credit for admitting the offence and have noted that you have not appeared before the committee for a similar offence since 2001. You have however received a warning letter in March 2009 for punching. The committee note that you only threw one punch which is reflected in the grading of the charge. It is clear that you threw a punch in retaliation however this is not acceptable from a professional player to retaliate in this manner. Therefore the committee have decided that a 1 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. Fielden: The committee give you credit for admitting the offence and for your good record considering the number of games you have played. The committee are satisfied that there was provocation and that you were in situation where you felt intimidated. However the committee have counted 4 punches thrown and although there is an element of provocation it is clear there is that you have retaliated in this instance. Retaliation is not acceptable. Therefore the committee feel that a 1 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. I can only assume none of them have bothered to appeal because they all pleaded guilty in the first place. how does two diffrent charges get the same fine thats rubbish if you ask me

Bilko wrote: Conclusions Mason: The committee give the player credit for admitting the offence. However this is the fourth time that you have appeared before the committee for similar offences and the committee view this seriously. It is clear from the DVD that you stood on Fielden's leg deliberately. The committee are not satisfied that Fielden went to strike your team mate however do note that he acted in an aggressive manner but you did run a considerable distance to get involved and this led to the incident escalating into a brawl. Committee take this type of incident very seriously and feel that a 3 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. Griffin: The committee give you credit for admitting the offence and have noted that you have not appeared before the committee for a similar offence since 2001. You have however received a warning letter in March 2009 for punching. The committee note that you only threw one punch which is reflected in the grading of the charge. It is clear that you threw a punch in retaliation however this is not acceptable from a professional player to retaliate in this manner. Therefore the committee have decided that a 1 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. Fielden: The committee give you credit for admitting the offence and for your good record considering the number of games you have played. The committee are satisfied that there was provocation and that you were in situation where you felt intimidated. However the committee have counted 4 punches thrown and although there is an element of provocation it is clear there is that you have retaliated in this instance. Retaliation is not acceptable. Therefore the committee feel that a 1 match suspension and £300 fine is appropriate. I can only assume none of them have bothered to appeal because they all pleaded guilty in the first place. how does two diffrent charges get the same fine thats rubbish if you ask me

Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:06 pm  

Griffin will be chuffed, he threw one punch and it connected. Fielden threw 4 and missed with all of them. Both get the same punishment.

Mason got what he deserved. However he stood on Fielden, he didnt stamp on him. If he had he would have caused serious injury.

Anyway move on.

[DaveO]

Re: 1 match ban : Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:47 pm  

FARTOWNFORLIFE wrote:

Mason got what he deserved. However he stood on Fielden, he didnt stamp on him. If he had he would have caused serious injury.

It doesn't matter if he stood or stamped - it was a deliberate dirty act which should have seen him sent off. Remember Beckham in the soccer world cup a few years ago? A feeble swish with his boot to kick a player with as much force as a mouse could muster. That didn't save him from the red card.

Instead three other teams will benefit from his absence for doing this, not the team he committed the offence against. Meanwhile Bentham can carry on being inept regardless.

Dave