Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Salford fined £10000


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#21 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,801 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 08:55 PM

The official in charge of controlling substitutions maybe. Just a thought. It is his job.

Yes, how much did he get fined ?
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#22 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,196 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 09:35 PM

That's a very harsh fine, hope the rfl explain why it's so harsh.

#23 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,229 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 10:09 PM

Yes, how much did he get fined ?

Well maybe we should be told, the officials on the pitch have a lot to contend with, the guy on the sideline counts them in and counts them out (ok he has other duties) in the main, what's  his excuse for an obvious cock-up.



Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#24 Saint Toppy

Saint Toppy
  • Coach
  • 2,654 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 08:03 AM

Yes, you're right westhuller.  We got fined £100 in 2006.  £10,000 is a ridiculous fine.  Nobody gets fined that amount in RL for anything.  They must have plucked that figure out of nowhere because it relates to nothing at all. 

 

I stand to be corrected but if I recall the Saints one was slightly different in that Cunningham was injured and in the process of leaving the field, and neither he or the player replacing him actually took an active part in any of the plays while there were 14 men on the field. Thats why the fine was so low as it was classed as a technical infringement where the club gained no advantage.

 

Salford on the other hand clearly gained an advantage as one of the players was involved in 3 tackles preventing Cas from scoring



#25 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,294 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 08:53 AM

Farce and clear evidence of the RFL's prejudice against SL clubs. If this had been,well, say Fev, they would not have DARED fine them that amount.

#26 Just Browny

Just Browny
  • Coach
  • 11,783 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 09:45 AM

It does seem quite a big fine, then again hopefully it will stop it happening again.

I think the responsibility should lie 50-50 between the officials and the clubs - it's very very easy for the clubs to sneak on an extra player if they are relieved of the responsibility to check.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.


#27 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,085 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 10:05 AM

We have seen this before - Saints and Bulls have both been found guilty and received very minor punishments. The fact that Salford have been found guilty of breaking 3 Ops rules and fined such a large amount shows that it was a severe offence.

 

It's no good people comparing the incidents as they were not like-for-like.

 

I'd suggest that after those two incidents the processes will have been reviewed and tightened if necessary - so for a 14th player to be on the field may suggest that Salford really failed on the process.



#28 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,129 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 10:27 AM

We have seen this before - Saints and Bulls have both been found guilty and received very minor punishments. The fact that Salford have been found guilty of breaking 3 Ops rules and fined such a large amount shows that it was a severe offence.

 

It's no good people comparing the incidents as they were not like-for-like.

 

I'd suggest that after those two incidents the processes will have been reviewed and tightened if necessary - so for a 14th player to be on the field may suggest that Salford really failed on the process.

Even though each player made a tackle, t'Bulls themselves noticed the error and flagged it up to the officials.

 

edit: slightly off-topic, though!


Edited by hindle xiii, 09 May 2013 - 10:27 AM.

On Odsal Top baht 'at.


#29 brooza

brooza
  • Moderator
  • 4,412 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 10:48 AM

Ignore


Edited by brooza, 09 May 2013 - 10:49 AM.

St Albans Centurions 1st Team Manager. Former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.

Moderator of the International board

#30 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,559 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 10:51 AM

I stand to be corrected but if I recall the Saints one was slightly different in that Cunningham was injured and in the process of leaving the field, and neither he or the player replacing him actually took an active part in any of the plays while there were 14 men on the field. Thats why the fine was so low as it was classed as a technical infringement where the club gained no advantage.

 

Salford on the other hand clearly gained an advantage as one of the players was involved in 3 tackles preventing Cas from scoring

Salford made just three tackles before being reduced back to 13 men and there was still time for Cas to score before the final hooter went so I don't see that the advantage was particularly significant, certainly not to the tune of £10,000.  The RFL has just pulled a figure out of their collective hat and as is per usual haven't had the grace to be transparent by explaining the inordinate difference in punishment between Saints/Bulls and Salford. 



#31 brooza

brooza
  • Moderator
  • 4,412 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 10:55 AM

Salford made just three tackles before being reduced back to 13 men and there was still time for Cas to score before the final hooter went so I don't see that the advantage was particularly significant, certainly not to the tune of £10,000.  The RFL has just pulled a figure out of their collective hat and as is per usual haven't had the grace to be transparent by explaining the inordinate difference in punishment between Saints/Bulls and Salford. 

Just because they haven't explained it to you, doesn't mean they haven't explained it to Salford


St Albans Centurions 1st Team Manager. Former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.

Moderator of the International board

#32 Kenilworth Tiger

Kenilworth Tiger
  • Coach
  • 8,993 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 11:11 AM

Salford made just three tackles before being reduced back to 13 men and there was still time for Cas to score before the final hooter went so I don't see that the advantage was particularly significant, certainly not to the tune of £10,000.  The RFL has just pulled a figure out of their collective hat and as is per usual haven't had the grace to be transparent by explaining the inordinate difference in punishment between Saints/Bulls and Salford.

I'll ask you again - what do YOU think is fair without plucking a figure from thin air?
Now then, it's a race between Sandie....and Fairburn....and the little man is in........yeees he's in.

I, just like those Castleford supporters felt that the ball should have gone to David Plange but he put the bit betwen his teeth...and it was a try

Kevin Ward - best player I have ever seen

Posted Image

The real Mick Gledhill is what you see on here, a Bradford fan ........, but deep down knows that Bradford are just not good enough to challenge the likes of Leeds & St Helens.


#33 sallywt

sallywt
  • Coach
  • 510 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 11:42 AM

Well maybe we should be told, the officials on the pitch have a lot to contend with, the guy on the sideline counts them in and counts them out (ok he has other duties) in the main, what's  his excuse for an obvious cock-up.

 

Why was it his obvious cock-up?  The interchange process is clear in that the player should report to the interchange official with the correct number.  I would guess from what has been said that he didn't.  The chances are that there wasn't an interchange official at the game after all it is a purely voluntary position which cannot always be covered.  This leaves all duties to the reserve and if he was busy with something else as he has a number of duties to perform then that is a possible explanation for what has happened.

 

it is the clubs responsibility to abide by the process and the official (if there is one) to ensure the process runs smoothly.  if the club fails to comply then it is them at fault.  All the clubs know the process.  it hasn't changed.  There is no excuse for getting it wrong.

 

I work the interchange position regularly.  I have done so on both Super league and Championship games and have never had more players on the field than there should be.  The process is simple so long as the clubs follow it.



#34 Red Willow

Red Willow
  • Coach
  • 4,725 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 11:45 AM

Salford were found guilty of unintentionally fielding 14 players. With the previous cases resulting in a small fine this seems excessive. There is no way to know whether the outcome of the game hinged on the 3 tackles, Salford might have made them anyway. I would have thought a fine of £1,000 with an additional portion suspended would have been more fitting. It will be interesting to see if this is the start of SL clubs being hit with larger fines

#35 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,129 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 11:46 AM

I work the interchange position regularly.  I have done so on both Super league and Championship games and have never had more players on the field than there should be.  The process is simple so long as the clubs follow it.

Sally, give us a wave. Sally, Sally, gives us a wave!


On Odsal Top baht 'at.