FORUMS FORUMS







RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
24 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!
  
WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - TV games (not Wire)
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:54 pm  
Well at least you can't use the decimated squad excuse if Leeds turn you over.
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:58 pm  
Saddened! wrote:
Take the club element out of it and look objectively at the position the arm was put into. It wouldn't have hurt Atkin and there was no force involved..


How can you possibly know that? The arm was deliberately moved into an unnatural position; it wasn't an attempt to slow the ptb down, it was a nasty act that is totally against the spirit of the game.
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Wed Sep 21, 2022 10:13 pm  
morrisseyisawire wrote:
How can you possibly know that? The arm was deliberately moved into an unnatural position; it wasn't an attempt to slow the ptb down, it was a nasty act that is totally against the spirit of the game.


No, that's scientifically wrong. That has been clarified during the hearing tonight and that being proven as a fact is what got Knowles off. The movement was proven to be within the natural range of motion of an arm and therefore is not chargeable as an offense as it could not be causing an unacceptable risk of injury. The ref is positioned to the left of Atkin as Knowles looks. He's hidden from the referee by Atkin's body, he's trying to hold him and prevent him playing the ball as the ref can't see him holding him, Atkin spins out of it to bring it to the referee's attention. If there had been ill intent from Knowles he could quite easily have yanked it to the right or pulled him down with force, but he didn't. Maybe he considered it, I can't prove he didn't, but he didn't actually carry it out. They've accepted that he should not have been charged in the first place.
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Wed Sep 21, 2022 10:49 pm  
Leeds may as well not turn up for the final, stains name is already engraved on trophy.

JOKE
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Wed Sep 21, 2022 11:25 pm  
Mr Snoodle wrote:
Leeds may as well not turn up for the final, stains name is already engraved on trophy.

JOKE


Leeds have a great chance of winning the game. They battered Wigan last week.
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Thu Sep 22, 2022 4:53 am  
I was actually going to post ‘even Saddened can’t defend this one’ I’m wrong again, is he a parody act? Laughable.
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Thu Sep 22, 2022 7:09 am  
Saddened! wrote:
No, that's scientifically wrong. That has been clarified during the hearing tonight and that being proven as a fact is what got Knowles off. The movement was proven to be within the natural range of motion of an arm and therefore is not chargeable as an offense as it could not be causing an unacceptable risk of injury. The ref is positioned to the left of Atkin as Knowles looks. He's hidden from the referee by Atkin's body, he's trying to hold him and prevent him playing the ball as the ref can't see him holding him, Atkin spins out of it to bring it to the referee's attention. If there had been ill intent from Knowles he could quite easily have yanked it to the right or pulled him down with force, but he didn't. Maybe he considered it, I can't prove he didn't, but he didn't actually carry it out. They've accepted that he should not have been charged in the first place.


It was the intent. He only had one reason to do that move. Therefore, this sets a precedent - any attempt to harm a player that doesn’t come off should go unpunished as there was no injury.

I look forward to seeing what happens with player welfare next season, especially after the zealous interpretations this year. In usual RL fashion, what is a trend this year becomes obsolete the very next.
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Thu Sep 22, 2022 7:39 am  
The game is a joke
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Thu Sep 22, 2022 8:47 am  
easyWire wrote:
It was the intent. He only had one reason to do that move. Therefore, this sets a precedent - any attempt to harm a player that doesn’t come off should go unpunished as there was no injury.

I look forward to seeing what happens with player welfare next season, especially after the zealous interpretations this year. In usual RL fashion, what is a trend this year becomes obsolete the very next.


Hopefully this incident and the process with the appeals will highlight the deficiencies in the system and be the driver for it all to be improved.

Imagine it was Warrington and you were hired to replace Karl Fitzpatrick. You can medically prove the arm wasn't outside the natural range of motion and you have video and MRP notes from previous incidents that were very similar this season that were judged to be 'no further action'. Would you appeal?
Re: TV games (not Wire) : Thu Sep 22, 2022 9:32 am  
:SHOOT: :SHOOT:
Saddened! wrote:
Hopefully this incident and the process with the appeals will highlight the deficiencies in the system and be the driver for it all to be improved.

Imagine it was Warrington and you were hired to replace Karl Fitzpatrick. You can medically prove the arm wasn't outside the natural range of motion and you have video and MRP notes from previous incidents that were very similar this season that were judged to be 'no further action'. Would you appeal?


No matter how flimsy an argument I had, if I was a saints official I would appeal absolutely every ban that was received to any of our players, knowing that the disciplinary panel have an obvious reluctance to punish saints players in line with the way those of other clubs are treated. Going back to (and beyond) lineham getting a 7 match ban and makinson 3 for a squirrel grip when makinsons was blatant and caught by sky cameras and linehams wasn't.

Why wouldn't saints players try their luck with dangerous tackles? I wouldn't be surprised if eamon received a written apology for the issuing of a yellow card in this incident.

To be fair the world Cup and Knowles being an England player probably helped saints cause in this instance. It shouldn't have at all, but to uphold the 2 game ban, they have set a precedent that frivolous appeals result in a ban extension which would have meant that an England player would be unavailable for 2 World Cup games in this instance.

The disciplinary panel and procedure needs a total overhaul as well as the penalty try guidelines.
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Kevin Turvey, Smiffy27 and 112 guests

REPLY

Subject: 
Message:
   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...

Return to Warrington Wolves