Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:58 pm  

I feel for Shenton, I really do. He's no spring chicken and he's gone through the Hell of predictions season and ended up losing a year of his career.

However, I was very disappointed with his and Powell's comments quoted by the BBC, it was a clear attempt to influence the disciplinary panel.

The disciplinary section on the RFL's website also states a grade B as 1 to 2 games, marked with an unanswered asterisk.

How do they get four?

Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:01 pm  

bishops finger wrote:

Will the RFL ban every player who attacks the legs for 4 games or just the ones that cause injury, can of worms been opened IMO.

Just seen Lee Jewitt's cannonball in the same game, far worse but not even a penalty given.

Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:11 pm  

I'm glad were appealing somebody needs to stand up to this decision i feel for Shenton but it was an accident and the red hall idiots have gone on the injury and not what actually happened

Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:12 pm  

rover49 wrote:

Just seen Lee Jewitt's cannonball in the same game, far worse but not even a penalty given.

Nothing wrong with it as it doesn't put undue pressure in the joint as it from behind, and keeping it the normal range if motion. Boudebza, whether he meant to or not, bent Shentons leg the wrong way.

FWIW I think its harsh to give 4 games. I think hes unlucky to be banned at all, as had Shenton not got injured the tackle would have gone unnoticed.

Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:21 pm  

I can see both sides of this.
Cas have lost a front-line player for a whole season because of a tackle that an independent panel have found to be illegal. In terms of the suspension, injury caused has always been a mitigating factor in setting the length of a suspension, hence the departure from the guidelines.
However, I have to assume that the panel had sight of further video footage, as the only clip I have seen is, in my opinion, inconclusive. Ultimately, only the offending player himself knows if the illegality of the tackle was intentional. I dislike it when coaches/commentators or anyone else claim that something is either intentional or not, as this is something only the offending player can possibly know.
All in all, both sets of supporters are disappointed with the incident. However, I suggest losing a player for four weeks is preferable to losing one for the whole season.
I have never liked the third man in making any contact with the legs, it would be easier just to ban it altogether.

Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:29 pm  

nottinghamtiger wrote:

I can see both sides of this.
Cas have lost a front-line player for a whole season because of a tackle that an independent panel have found to be illegal. In terms of the suspension, injury caused has always been a mitigating factor in setting the length of a suspension, hence the departure from the guidelines.
However, I have to assume that the panel had sight of further video footage, as the only clip I have seen is, in my opinion, inconclusive. Ultimately, only the offending player himself knows if the illegality of the tackle was intentional. I dislike it when coaches/commentators or anyone else claim that something is either intentional or not, as this is something only the offending player can possibly know.
All in all, both sets of supporters are disappointed with the incident. However, I suggest losing a player for four weeks is preferable to losing one for the whole season.
I have never liked the third man in making any contact with the legs, it would be easier just to ban it altogether.

I was going to post something myself about intent, so as you have, I'll follow you up.

I can't remember what the incident was last year, but I remember a ref making a decision on a foul that had been commited. The ref had given the penalty and decided that that was sufficient due to the lack of intention from the player. I thought at the time how ridiculous that was for the exact same reason you have stated, in that nobody but the player knows the intention.

A ref and disciplinary panel are there to penalise fouls. Whether the player meant to do it or not, its still a foul. But should similar penalties be given the same grading, and ban? I'm not sure. Its certainly a grey area in all sports.

Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:47 pm  

I feel for Shenton. A solid decent pro.
Boudebza getting a ban is a joke. I like Cas and Powell. However he has let himself down on this. He sends Jewitt out each week and sits watching him trying to injure and assault players each week. I hear no bleating from him about that nor any evidence of reeling him in.
Gronk clearly is a wind up merchant or a Cyclops.
Goulding didn't have the ball....Carney hit him late. Silence from Powell on that. That was a career over not a year out.
Ours is a fantastic sport governed by crooked buffoons. If this ban isn't overturned then a lot of clubs are going to need bigger squads including Cas.

Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:49 pm  

Sandro II Terrorista wrote:

Have you turned into Judge Nutmeg?

If he is I want a go on his mobile court.

He can't be as a moderator he doesn't dispense enough justice.

He could be Les?

Anyone got any chives?

Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:52 pm  

Burtons Forearm wrote:

I feel for Shenton. A solid decent pro.
Boudebza getting a ban is a joke. I like Cas and Powell. However he has let himself down on this. He sends Jewitt out each week and sits watching him trying to injure and assault players each week. I hear no bleating from him about that nor any evidence of reeling him in.
Gronk clearly is a wind up merchant or a Cyclops.
Goulding didn't have the ball....Carney hit him late. Silence from Powell on that. That was a career over not a year out.
Ours is a fantastic sport governed by crooked buffoons. If this ban isn't overturned then a lot of clubs are going to need bigger squads including Cas.

Your comments are rather odd given Jewitt has never even been charged with an offence during his time at Cas? Indeed, he has spent most of the time he has been at Cas unavailable and caring for his premature and seriously ill twins. Are you sure you mean Jewitt?
However, unless the panel have had more video footage I think a ban is rather unlucky.

Re: Opener versus Cas Tigers : Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:59 pm  

Yes I mean Jewitt. The same pr#ck who played for Salford.
We're discussing the rfl disciplinary process. He's an ideal example of what is wrong.
Boudebza appears involved by most onlookers in an accident. Gets 4 games.
Jewitt spends every game assaulting players....nothing.
How sick his children are are an irrelevance. The blokes a thug and Powell condones him making Powell a raving hypocrite on this issue.