95 replies to this topic

[steef]

Most late hits are as a result of the defender trying to put preasure on the kicker or tackle the ball carrier, they then (wrongly) decide to hit the player once the ball has gone. What was tomkins trying to do? dislodge a ball with his forearm? of all the late hits in the game, easily the worst one and deserves a ban to try and help eradicate such incidents from the game, its tough enough as it is.

[Padge]

You's gone all wussy, rip NE-lite a new 'un.

I thnk you're confusing me with someone else, Ed sommert or other perhaps?

Edited by Padge, 17 July 2010 - 01:11 PM.

[sam]

never mind protecting the little players, who's going to start protecting stuart 'christ, i cost loads' fielden.

[Exiled Wiganer]

Me?

I'm not one-eyed, I wasn't fussed who's going to win*. I've bigger RL based problems closer to home. I'll concede slow-motion and wet weather made it look worse, but it was still late.

I've made comment on the late challenges, and Carvell's hit on Tomkins IMO would've been binned if not for being 2 minutes into the game, this is wrong, but it happened.

*and this 'everyone hates Wigan' self-defence excuse is boring.

You're not one-eyed at all. It was the bell end who started the thread. I should have quoted him. Soz.

[Wakefield Ram]

Think there is a difference in a late charge and what Tomkins did to Myler. He had scored, was lying on the ground and Tomkins dived in with a forearm to the head. Yes, it should have been an 8 point try and Tomkins should get cited and banned.

[hindle xiii]

You're not one-eyed at all. It was the bell end who started the thread. I should have quoted him. Soz.

I wondered that afterwards...!

[hindle xiii]

I thnk you're confusing me with someone else, Ed sommert or other perhaps?

This guy?

Don't want to get on the wrong side of him, he's quackers...

[amh]

never mind protecting the little players, who's going to start protecting stuart 'christ, i cost loads' fielden.

he does a damsel in distress so well

[3owls]

You're not one-eyed at all. It was the bell end who started the thread. I should have quoted him. Soz.

I'm a bit disappointed in you old lad, i thought maybe you were the one wigan fan that would rise above juvenile name calling when somebody passes comment on wigan and you're not in agreement. I won't bother retaliating in the name calling stakes because thats something i did about forty years ago in the playground. There were plenty of hits throughout the game and a few of them were a little late, the reason why i highlighted this particular incident was because of the sheer malice involved. Have a look again if you've taped it, the view from behind the sticks is the most incriminating. Myler is layed on his back with the ball grounded and tomkins is at least three or four yards away and not committed to the tackle at that point. What he does next is cowardly and dangerous, and i'm sure the disciplinary panel will vindicate my opinion they dish out the ban. He'll get away with a similar incident in the last minute when he came in late as the 3rd man on an already grounded westwood because his swinging arm missed and layed out fielden instead. I'm afraid your views are beginning to echo those of most wigan fans on here who seem to think their players should be free from criticism when they are clearly in the wrong.

[Exiled Wiganer]

That has really made me take stock of myself. Who am I turning into? What have I become? You have truly held a mirror up to me and I cannot believe what I have seen in it. How can I ever repay you?
I don't suppose you have Peacock's attack on Sam somewhere, as it would be good to hear your perspective on that.

[Padge]

I'm afraid your views are beginning to echo those of most Wigan fans on here who seem to think their players should be free from criticism when they are clearly in the wrong.

I'm afraid you are talking ######, you opened a thread titled ...Protecting the 'little' players. You then cited one single incident in a game full of incidents. Why did you choose to ignore the other incidents in the same game, why not, as EW points out, mention Peacocks attack on Tomkins as another example.

You got rumbled immediately and people didn't play and now you're sulking, you'll get over it.

[tonyXIII]

I'm afraid you are talking ######, you opened a thread titled ...Protecting the 'little' players. You then cited one single incident in a game full of incidents. Why did you choose to ignore the other incidents in the same game, why not, as EW points out, mention Peacocks attack on Tomkins as another example.

You got rumbled immediately and people didn't play and now you're sulking, you'll get over it.

You sure of that?

[Padge]

You sure of that?

I like to give BoD.

[3owls]

I'm afraid you are talking ######, you opened a thread titled ...Protecting the 'little' players. You then cited one single incident in a game full of incidents. Why did you choose to ignore the other incidents in the same game, why not, as EW points out, mention Peacocks attack on Tomkins as another example.

You got rumbled immediately and people didn't play and now you're sulking, you'll get over it.

To answer you and your over defensive mate there are a couple of differences between thug tomkins and the peacock tackle.

A. Peacock was tackling one of the most elusive players in S.L at full speed who he caught with an open hand,
Tomkins was assaulting a player laying prone on the floor with his forearm in a cowardly premeditated assault.

B. Peacock is a great ambassador for the game with an excellent disciplinary record who is well respected by his fellow players and opposition supporters (except one eyed wigan fans),
Tomkins is a walking ASBO that just happens to play rugby league with a chequered disciplinary record in his short career. You just have to look at his gormless face to see there's not a lot happening behind the eyes.

There you go, that was easy wasn't it? I'm sure you could have worked that one out for yourselves.

[hindle xiii]

To answer you and your over defensive mate there are a couple of differences between thug tomkins and the peacock tackle.

A. Peacock was tackling one of the most elusive players in S.L at full speed who he caught with an open hand,
Tomkins was assaulting a player laying prone on the floor with his forearm in a cowardly premeditated assault.

B. Peacock is a great ambassador for the game with an excellent disciplinary record who is well respected by his fellow players and opposition supporters (except one eyed wigan fans),
Tomkins is a walking ASBO that just happens to play rugby league with a chequered disciplinary record in his short career. You just have to look at his gormless face to see there's not a lot happening behind the eyes.

There you go, that was easy wasn't it? I'm sure you could have worked that one out for yourselves.

A. You made a decent point.
B. You ###### all over any credibility of the first point.

[Padge]

To answer you and your over defensive mate there are a couple of differences between thug tomkins and the peacock tackle.

A. Peacock was tackling one of the most elusive players in S.L at full speed who he caught with an open hand,
Tomkins was assaulting a player laying prone on the floor with his forearm in a cowardly premeditated assault.

B. Peacock is a great ambassador for the game with an excellent disciplinary record who is well respected by his fellow players and opposition supporters (except one eyed wigan fans),
Tomkins is a walking ASBO that just happens to play rugby league with a chequered disciplinary record in his short career. You just have to look at his gormless face to see there's not a lot happening behind the eyes.

There you go, that was easy wasn't it? I'm sure you could have worked that one out for yourselves.

But you started a thread about protecting players, though you seem only interested in one incident.

Should players be protected from the likes of Peacock Morley and Anderson or is this just a campaign against one player. If it is the latter then I suggest you should change your misleading topic title.

You've been ruuuummmmbbbbled

[hindle xiii]

But you started a thread about protecting players, though you seem only interested in one incident.

Should players be protected from the likes of Peacock Morley and Anderson or is this just a campaign against one player. If it is the latter then I suggest you should change your misleading topic title.

You've been ruuuummmmbbbbled

Ed the duck is back!

[3owls]

But you started a thread about protecting players, though you seem only interested in one incident.

Should players be protected from the likes of Peacock Morley and Anderson or is this just a campaign against one player. If it is the latter then I suggest you should change your misleading topic title.

You've been ruuuummmmbbbbled

It doesn't matter who the player is but for the worst tackles when there isn't a shadow of doubt there was malicious intent to cause serious injury lengthy bans should be forthcoming. The worst "tackle" last night by a country mile was joel tomkins. Late, premeditated, cowardly and in front of the sky cameras means that tomkins will be receiving a ban for sure, whether the R.F.L cite any other incidents during that game is open to debate. It's not about a person, it's about a tackle. The only time anybodys character should be put under the microscope is when they have previous, in this case tomkins has been cautioned twice already this season and i'm sure that won't help his case. By the way did you see him knock fielden out whilst trying to decapitate ben westwood (also on the deck)? Brave lad.

[Padge]

It doesn't matter who the player is but for the worst tackles when there isn't a shadow of doubt there was malicious intent to cause serious injury lengthy bans should be forthcoming. The worst "tackle" last night by a country mile was joel tomkins. Late, premeditated, cowardly and in front of the sky cameras means that tomkins will be receiving a ban for sure, whether the R.F.L cite any other incidents during that game is open to debate. It's not about a person, it's about a tackle. The only time anybodys character should be put under the microscope is when they have previous, in this case tomkins has been cautioned twice already this season and i'm sure that won't help his case. By the way did you see him knock fielden out whilst trying to decapitate ben westwood (also on the deck)? Brave lad.

I didn't realise that you work for the disciplinary, you have full access to the facts already. The video from all angles, the referees report and the match commissionaires report. What you saw is only what you saw.

Now about changing the topic title so that you don't cause any confusion about what your thread is really about...

[3owls]

I didn't realise that you work for the disciplinary, you have full access to the facts already. The video from all angles, the referees report and the match commissionaires report. What you saw is only what you saw.

Now about changing the topic title so that you don't cause any confusion about what your thread is really about...

It helps when you watch the game through TWO eyes. Goodnight.