newgroundb4wakey wrote:
I know I said that it was my final say on the matter but some thing else has come to my attention.
On Tuesday evening Castleford Tigers Supporters Club had one of their regular "meet the coaches events" At the event Powell was asked about the Boudebza tackle and said he has had a phone call from HKR (no name given but I would hazard a guess it was JP) expressing regret and apologising for the incident and wishing Michael Shenton a speedy recovery. Powell said that as far as he was concerned "that was the end of it as far as he was concerned". Which would suggest to me he was happy to accept the apology, so why did Hudgell feel the need to re-ignite the argument?
It is a fine but important distinction, but given that JB pleaded not guilty, I'd assume that it was intended as an expression of regret, but not an apology. His description of it as an apology, while not necessarily intentionally so, might itself be seen as inflammatory. Unless the Hull KR representative said 'we apologise' or similar.
The whole assumption of guilt thing apparent in the process has been a big part of the problem.
I agree that our issue really is with the RFL, rather than, or a least much more so than with Cas. They're entitled to their opinion, as we're entitled to ours. The RFL should listen to both, and where they differ look at the evidence, assuming innocence unless that evidence shows otherwise.