95 replies to this topic

[Exiled Wiganer]

Joel needs to learn that being a petulant player serves neither his nor his team's interests.
Cliffy - how is Ryan Bailey these days?

[Hannibal]

Thought the incident was a nasty one and totally unessessary. I dont have a high opinion of this guys disipline.
He is often 3rd man in with the knees and with other niggles in tackles and can be seen on numerous occasions during Fridays game comitting unessary infringements in the tackle. As for Carvell he was committed and pulled out slightly on impact. Nothing more than that for me.......Tomkins, well, did he need to get involved with any contact ? I think not.

Senior?

Bailey?

Peacock?

Webb?

Need I go on?

[hindle xiii]

Senior?
Bailey?
Peacock?
Webb?
Need I go on?

I said similar to Padge too, it's a bit lazy just to point the finger at the poster's team, we can slag those off when the time is right!

Can I not comment on Wigan's narrow loss because my team narrowly lost today? Or because they've now lost 100 games in a row?!

[Padge]

I said similar to Padge too, it's a bit lazy just to point the finger at the poster's team, we can slag those off when the time is right!

Once again for the hard of reading.

Read the topic title, the original poster started a general topic on protecting 'little' players.
We are mearly staying on topic.

[hindle xiii]

Once again for the hard of reading.

Read the topic title, the original poster started a general topic on protecting 'little' players.
We are mearly staying on topic.

Fine, point out everyone else's flaws while ignoring your own.

[1976PMJwires]

Fine, point out everyone else's flaws while ignoring your own.

Didn't you know he flawless!!!

sorry absolutely flawless

opening part of the tune makes me laugh

Just like perfection
Ego alert, flawless
Absolutely flawless



Sounds like a wiganer to me

[Padge]

Fine, point out everyone else's flaws while ignoring your own.

What's flawed about staying on topic.

[Cliffy Lyons]

Joel needs to learn that being a petulant player serves neither his nor his team's interests.
Cliffy - how is Ryan Bailey these days?

I thought we were talking about Mr Tomkins ? I have my opinions on Bailey also, but that should be discussed on a second thread I suggest you create ! Why change the subject of the conversation ? Typical comments of several posters on this forum.......................get a life and discuss the thread !

[Padge]

get a life and discuss the thread !

Would you care to give us the topic title?

[hindle xiii]

Would you care to give us the topic title?

Ahh, I know what it is you're doing now, after months of every thread eventually becoming about either Warrington or Wigan, you've turned it around from a thread about Warrington and Wigan to mean everyone else!

[Padge]

Ahh, I know what it is you're doing now, after months of every thread eventually becoming about either Warrington or Wigan, you've turned it around from a thread about Warrington and Wigan to mean everyone else!

The thread is about 'little players', I believe all teams have them.

[hindle xiii]

The thread is about 'little players', I believe all teams have them.

Caring and sharing.

[Dave T]

An eight point try can only be awarded if the try scorer is fouled during the act of touching down not in any subsequent period.

However you have fallen for the OP's intention here, he claimed to want a discussion about protecting ALL 'little' players, which some of us have offered to discuss. However it turns out that really he wanted to hid behind a misleading topic title in order to pretend he was being fair when really he wanted to discuss one particular incident in a game of many.

I suggest the OP changes the topic title to avoid confusion. Meanwhile I have to assume he wants an open discussion about all the incidents recently which are covered by his topic title.

So what about Anderson deliberately and dangerously going head first into a tackle to attempt to dislodge the ball, surely leading with the head is as dangerous as leading with the elbow.

Thanks for answering my question (so I assume an '8 point try' couldn't have been awarded here), but actually there was no need for the second paragraph.
The OP wasn't trying to do anything underhand, or get anyone to fall into a trap, indeed he could simply have titled the thread about the incident had he wanted to. He linked the incident in question to a previous incident which was very relevant, so nobody has fallen for anything.

As regards your comments about Anderson, I'm not sure what the hell you are on about. Any chance of giving me a clue about what is wrong about leading with the head? Do you mean into the opposition players head? God knows what you Wigan fans are wathcing, but hey, at least you aren't coming across bitter, even the reasonable ones.

[Dave T]

So, after that little girly rant, are you happy that Morley hit the kicker at least 4 times in that game?

If you are, I can only assume that you are just as happy for Wigan to reciprocate.

Try to answer without typing in a squeaky voice.

Fair play, it was a bit of a girly rant, and I admit I bit.

If Morley has done anything wrong, I will go with what the disciplinary say (which I have generally always done - as opposed to most others here), however Sky certainly didn't highlight any issues, and they love making a mountain out of a mole-hill, so let's just wait and see, I can only go off what Sky showed and discussed due to the fact I wasn't there at the stadium.

[Padge]

Thanks for answering my question (so I assume an '8 point try' couldn't have been awarded here), but actually there was no need for the second paragraph.
The OP wasn't trying to do anything underhand, or get anyone to fall into a trap, indeed he could simply have titled the thread about the incident had he wanted to. He linked the incident in question to a previous incident which was very relevant, so nobody has fallen for anything.

As regards your comments about Anderson, I'm not sure what the hell you are on about. Any chance of giving me a clue about what is wrong about leading with the head? Do you mean into the opposition players head? God knows what you Wigan fans are wathcing, but hey, at least you aren't coming across bitter, even the reasonable ones.

An 8 point try could not have been awarded if as is claimed Tomkins committed a foul after the grounding and was coming in late, everyone seems to refer to Tomkins being late, therfore the grounding must have been completed. The rule is quite specific about the offence occurring during the act of a player touching down.

THINK ABOUT IT.

The OP has conviently disappeared since he got rumbled. His intention was to start a thread about an open subject when he really had a specific mission in mind, its an age old tactic which he failed at completely by to soon getting into his true rant. The way to do these type of deceptions is to talk about anything but your point at first and then draw your target in.

Your silly remark about bitterness is way below you, or I thought it was, but your recent rants are making me have second thoughts.

[Dave T]

An 8 point try could not have been awarded if as is claimed Tomkins committed a foul after the grounding and was coming in late, everyone seems to refer to Tomkins being late, therfore the grounding must have been completed. The rule is quite specific about the offence occurring during the act of a player touching down.

THINK ABOUT IT.

The OP has conviently disappeared since he got rumbled. His intention was to start a thread about an open subject when he really had a specific mission in mind, its an age old tactic which he failed at completely by to soon getting into his true rant. The way to do these type of deceptions is to talk about anything but your point at first and then draw your target in.

Your silly remark about bitterness is way below you, or I thought it was, but your recent rants are making me have second thoughts.

Re. your first paragraph, that is exactly as I read your initial response, and acknowledged that, so not sure why you had to type THINK ABOUT IT.

Re. your last paragraph, fair point, and I apologise, unfortunately we all get caught up in the emotion of RL and the debating around it, and I am as bad as anyone, I am just disappointed with some of the comments, and some of the comments aimed at me questioning my support of RL and my team. The bitterness comment was silly though, I agree.

[Barry Badrinath]

I dont think thats entirely correct, you can touch the kicker but only if your already committed to a tackle. You cant hit late or change your direction into a kicker. I think. Though the way the RFL are acting lately it might have changed already.

Thats correct, and that if you actually watch the game without a wigan based mard lip you'll see that morley on the two occasions when he got the kicker had already launched himself prior to the ball going, its not a concious effort after the ball has gone.

If it was the other way round, i wouldn't have a problem with it considering its a split second rather than the jason hooper variety, there may be a tad more leniancy as we're a team who this year is putting alot of emphasis on charge downs, without any kicker contact.

Likewise with the louis anderson on leuluai job, if you watch it back anderson has already launched himself towards where he's expecting Tommy to be, prior to him offloading the ball,he can't stop in mid air can he?

I though that the penalty carvell gave away was a bit harsh, mcrae had it spot on in commentary, carvell had actually started to slow down and pull up, and was a bump with his arms down more than a tackle off the ball.

I've no qualms about it, but its not as bad as the pie eaters are making it out. If anything it was the same as they were telling everyone lockers did back at murrayfield, cept carvell didn't have a forearm up.


i also note there's not been any mention or apologies re mathers getting pushed into the pitchside hoardings by a wigan player inthe first half.

[Padge]

Thats correct, and that if you actually watch the game without a wigan based mard lip you'll see that morley on the two occasions when he got the kicker had already launched himself prior to the ball going, its not a concious effort after the ball has gone.

If it was the other way round, i wouldn't have a problem with it considering its a split second rather than the jason hooper variety, there may be a tad more leniancy as we're a team who this year is putting alot of emphasis on charge downs, without any kicker contact.

Likewise with the louis anderson on leuluai job, if you watch it back anderson has already launched himself towards where he's expecting Tommy to be, prior to him offloading the ball,he can't stop in mid air can he?

I though that the penalty carvell gave away was a bit harsh, mcrae had it spot on in commentary, carvell had actually started to slow down and pull up, and was a bump with his arms down more than a tackle off the ball.

I've no qualms about it, but its not as bad as the pie eaters are making it out. If anything it was the same as they were telling everyone lockers did back at murrayfield, cept carvell didn't have a forearm up.


i also note there's not been any mention or apologies re mathers getting pushed into the pitchside hoardings by a wigan player inthe first half.

Lend me your glasses, I'll watch it again with yours on.

[Hannibal]

Thats correct, and that if you actually watch the game without a wigan based mard lip you'll see that morley on the two occasions when he got the kicker had already launched himself prior to the ball going, its not a concious effort after the ball has gone.

If it was the other way round, i wouldn't have a problem with it considering its a split second rather than the jason hooper variety, there may be a tad more leniancy as we're a team who this year is putting alot of emphasis on charge downs, without any kicker contact.

Likewise with the louis anderson on leuluai job, if you watch it back anderson has already launched himself towards where he's expecting Tommy to be, prior to him offloading the ball,he can't stop in mid air can he?

I though that the penalty carvell gave away was a bit harsh, mcrae had it spot on in commentary, carvell had actually started to slow down and pull up, and was a bump with his arms down more than a tackle off the ball.

I've no qualms about it, but its not as bad as the pie eaters are making it out. If anything it was the same as they were telling everyone lockers did back at murrayfield, cept carvell didn't have a forearm up.


i also note there's not been any mention or apologies re mathers getting pushed into the pitchside hoardings by a wigan player inthe first half.

You don't have a problem with it?

Well you wouldn't would you? You say you haven't got a problem with it, then go on to exonerate every Wire player from blame for anything.

How can you have a problem with something that patently did not happen?

[Dave T]

Two mentions on the RFL disciplinary section for Friday's game.

Carvell for his 2nd minute late hit - no charge.

Tomkins for his 30th minute late hit - Grade A charge. Looks like they are simply calling him up for the lateness rather than a striking charge.

Not sure if the site is 100% up to date, but no mention of any other incidents.