Chris71 wrote:
Not the best example to use.
I think had it been a hard collision and possible head, neck or spinal issue then fine I can understand the repercussions of trying to get a player up but I think Gale will have known how much contact there was. I think Gale was wrong to try and lift Lomax up but the argument that he could have been seriously injured is a mute one and the fact once Gale was carded Lomax then stopped hobbling almost immediately and saw out the game on the field.
Sorry no he didn't - Lomax missed the first 15 minutes of the second half getting stitched up - and I don't know how many times you rewatched the game, but he wasn't moving freely after that moment - Dodd did significantly more of the kicking compared to last week, and most of the play went through Welsby. So this myth that "Lomax was fine" is just that, a myth.
Further to claim its a mute point that Lomax could have been seriously injured means its also a mute point if Lomax wasnt seriously injured (aka "play acting") - which was my whole point - at that moment in time Gale could have done lots of things but picking up Lomax wasnt one of them.
Chris71 wrote:
Think the RFL actually face a dilemma here due to the incidents and inconsistencies from the officials in that game and the level of gamesmanship particularly from Welsby who clearly played for a penalty by doing what he did by putting himself to the ground head first to con the ref. He isn't a daft lad I'm sure and he'd be aware if an opposing player was adjudged to have caused it in the tackle they'd have been carded. Again as soon as Kendall blew his whistle his holding of his neck immediately stopped and he jumped straight up. If the RFL want to stamp out foul play then it has to be all foul play both physical and gamesmanship because currently the path they are on by clamping down to severely just invites more sh!thousery play in terms of conning refs like Welsby did which will eventually kill the game.
To me Welsby stopped holding his head as the Hull player got off him but hey ho, you see what you see right. The lawsuit against the RFL will do significantly more in "killing the game" then any perceived player indiscretions on the pitch, we have to protect players head and neck - and like it or not, thats where Welsby ended up. Welsby twisting in the tackle definitely contributed to him going to ground, and I dont think it was a bad one - but the thought Welsby decided to spear tackle himself to get a penalty is a biased perception. Much like booing Saints players for being late on the kicker ... when they were making contact wasnt late and in fact the ball was still in the players hand.
Chris71 wrote:
For me Gale should get a 3 game ban and severe warning for his future conduct but also the incident involving Welsby should result in a 1 game ban for unsporting conduct as a message to say this type of action by players will not be tolerated in the game.
But knowing the RFL they will just consistently be inconsistent and to the continued detriment to the game.
You are presupposing your version of events is the correct one, and you cant have it both ways - you cant say "Gale should be warned for his unsporting conduct" and Welsby "should get a ban for his unsporting conduct" even though one has been deemed by the RFL who are somewhat more neutral than both of us on the matter, and one has not. You are asking for inconsistency, whilst complaining about inconsistency...
I am the hash browns of rlfans 
