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
- - - - -

Dragons boss blasts RFL disciplinary process


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#1 League Express

League Express
  • Moderator
  • 1,030 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 09:06 AM

Catalan Dragons coach, Laurent Frayssinous has expressed his frustration at seeing back rower, Zeb Taia, suspended on Tuesday evening by the RFL disciplinary tribunal for a grade C, reckless striking with the shoulder offence on Gareth O'Brien during Saturday's 26-6 defeat to St Helens.

Click here to view the article

League Express is Britain's biggest selling Rugby League publication
On sale every Monday, in shops, on subscription and online for PC/MAC, iPad, iPhone, Android & Kindle Fire.
Follow us on Twitter @leagueexpress
Like us on Facebook - www.facebook.com/rugbyleagueexpress


#2 MrFussy

MrFussy
  • Coach
  • 1,583 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 11:05 AM

Hmm, an interesting read. I completely understand their frustration. The most obvious comparable incident which springs to mind is the Scott Taylor hit because it happened in our previous game and to the same player. Given the similarity I can see why they're annoyed, the precedent which was set when Taylor was cleared hasn't been followed here. I did personally feel that Taia's was the more clear cut of the two incidents though, there was more doubt involved in Taylor's case.

 

Given that O'Brien ended up with a head injury I'm struggling to see how there couldn't have been high contact, unless of course it happened as he hit the ground. I thought it was a bad hit (I'm admittedly a little biased) and think a three game ban is acceptable. I do think we need more consistency though, but appreciate that no two incidents are exactly the same which obviously presents difficulties.

 

I don't blame Brown for his comments in this instance. It's a distressing thing to see happen, especially in two games on the trot.



#3 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 4,959 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 11:10 AM

I haven't seen the Taia incident so can't really comment. However, the Catalans whenever I have seen them on TV etc do seem to get a raw deal compared to most teams.

 

NB - the Dragons have released the following video:

 

http://www.superleag...medium=facebook

 

Initial reaction is that they have a point...


Edited by GeordieSaint, 08 August 2013 - 11:34 AM.

Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#4 BBR

BBR
  • Coach
  • 625 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 12:37 PM

The only conclusion I can think of is that rfl judged the last one as making contact with the head. However, two of those on the video look as bad if not worse.

#5 oiseau

oiseau
  • Coach
  • 1,324 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 04:55 PM

I haven't seen the Taia incident so can't really comment. However, the Catalans whenever I have seen them on TV etc do seem to get a raw deal compared to most teams.

 

NB - the Dragons have released the following video:

 

http://www.superleag...medium=facebook

 

Initial reaction is that they have a point...

Yes, they do have a point but this is nothing new - over the seasons some of the reffing displays (VR included) have been embarassing to say the least.

 

I'ts been going on for years and Toulouse had the same problems during their three-year stint in the Championship.

 

LF is right to finally say something, the fans as well as players and officials have been banging on about it for years.

 

I fear for Toulouse if they have to endure that kind of treatment in the future.



#6 South Wakefield Sharks

South Wakefield Sharks
  • Coach
  • 2,213 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 05:26 PM

Appeal dismissed. Can't find many people who think that an incident like that shouldn't result in the attacker having to sit out a few games.



#7 redjonn

redjonn
  • Coach
  • 955 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 05:30 PM

Sorry I think it was the right decision to ban him, in fact should have been longer.  I don't think the other one's shown in the "defence" video are at the same level as Zeb Taia tackle.    But even if you judge them close and then they should also have been banned and yep could consider themselves lucky, that should not mean that the RFL should not have banned him.   However I would disagree as in my opinion the others are marginal and in fact in some they do raise their arms as to try and tackle whereas the Zeb Taia was absolutely reckless with no attempt to use arms to tackle.



#8 South Wakefield Sharks

South Wakefield Sharks
  • Coach
  • 2,213 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 06:03 PM

I haven't seen the Taia incident so can't really comment. However, the Catalans whenever I have seen them on TV etc do seem to get a raw deal compared to most teams.

 

NB - the Dragons have released the following video:

 

http://www.superleag...medium=facebook

 

Initial reaction is that they have a point...

 

Quite a nice little video that. Well done the Dragons. Taia's tackle was still a disgrace, worse than all the others and he deserves the ban. Scott Taylor, I think can consider himself a lucky lad, but the others no comparison.



#9 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,690 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 06:28 PM

Appeal dismissed. Can't find many people who think that an incident like that shouldn't result in the attacker having to sit out a few games.


I don't think that this is the issue here, the issue is that exactly the same offence occurred two weeks previously and no charge was brought by the disciplinary. A precedent was set,there were no directives from the RFL in the meantime, so why is the offence by a Catalan player deemed to be far more serious? This is at best incompetence, at worse corruption.

#10 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,198 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 07:01 PM

totally agree, scott taylor commits a serious shoulder charge on gaz o'brien and it is deemed penalty sufficient, whereas a dragons player commits the same offence on the same player and gets 3 matches...............teflon wigan once again.
"Why is Napoleon crying ?" said one sailor to the other, "poor ###### thinks he's being exiled to st helens" came the reply.



https://scontent-a-l...276002364_n.jpg

#11 giwildgo

giwildgo
  • Coach
  • 4,048 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 07:45 PM

Having viewed the video, the injustice is that Taia got a suspension not that the others didn't and should have. As far as I can see, none of the challenges involved clear contact with the head which is a critical distinction between a late tackle / shoulder charge being just a penalty or a dismissal under the current rules. Can't help thinking that Catalans may be getting a raw deal following the shocker on Fages, and the fact that Brown was bleating because it was O'Brien getting ko'd yet again. No one wants to see players get injured, but none of those challenges were comparable to the high and late ones such as McIlorum or Chase last year. In general since the shoulder charge was 'banned', people are getting confused about what decision should follow when it happens. A shoulder charge is no different to a high tackle, in so far as it is by no means an automatic dismissal or foul play worthy of suspension.

#12 giwildgo

giwildgo
  • Coach
  • 4,048 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 07:50 PM


totally agree, scott taylor commits a serious shoulder charge on gaz o'brien and it is deemed penalty sufficient, whereas a dragons player commits the same offence on the same player and gets 3 matches...............teflon wigan once again.

Taylor didn't get a suspension because it wasn't worthy of suspension. If you view the incident carefully, O'Brien is actually knocked out by incidental contact with his own player's hip rather than the shoulder charge.

The issue is the poor call in suspending Taia, not some paranoid and misguided anti Wigan drivel. Plenty of shoulder charges by most SL teams have had nothing more than a penalty this year.

#13 MrFussy

MrFussy
  • Coach
  • 1,583 posts

Posted 08 August 2013 - 09:13 PM

Having viewed the video, the injustice is that Taia got a suspension not that the others didn't and should have. As far as I can see, none of the challenges involved clear contact with the head which is a critical distinction between a late tackle / shoulder charge being just a penalty or a dismissal under the current rules. Can't help thinking that Catalans may be getting a raw deal following the shocker on Fages, and the fact that Brown was bleating because it was O'Brien getting ko'd yet again. No one wants to see players get injured, but none of those challenges were comparable to the high and late ones such as McIlorum or Chase last year. In general since the shoulder charge was 'banned', people are getting confused about what decision should follow when it happens. A shoulder charge is no different to a high tackle, in so far as it is by no means an automatic dismissal or foul play worthy of suspension.

Agreed, but a deliberate and malicious high shot may well be worthy of a dismissal or ban so you'd have to say the same of a shoulder charge. I don't know how much malice there was in Taia's hit but it was clearly deliberate, but then again when isn't a shoulder charge? I find it hard to tell how much contact was made with the head from that angle but it certainly looks like there may have been some, which is supported by the Injury O'Brien sustained.

 

As I say I do sympathise with Catalans but think this is a very difficult area to assess. Although it wouldn't have made much difference here due to the uncertainty involved, I'd still like to see the outright ban on shoulder charges dropped and simply see attacks to the head heavily punished.



#14 Saint Toppy

Saint Toppy
  • Coach
  • 2,656 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 07:05 AM

The best thing the RFL can do now to dig themselves out of the mess they've created is to change the rules to state categorically that any late shoulder charge will incur an automatic ban, and its just the length of the ban that will be determined by the severity of the hit.

 

I'd like to see an automatic 3 match ban with the disciplinary having the discretion to increase this to 12 matches.

It wouldn't take long for the players & coaches to get the message



#15 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,690 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 07:30 AM

The best thing the RFL can do now to dig themselves out of the mess they've created is to change the rules to state categorically that any late shoulder charge will incur an automatic ban, and its just the length of the ban that will be determined by the severity of the hit.

I'd like to see an automatic 3 match ban with the disciplinary having the discretion to increase this to 12 matches.
It wouldn't take long for the players & coaches to get the message


Good suggestion

#16 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 4,959 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 07:40 AM

I don't think that this is the issue here, the issue is that exactly the same offence occurred two weeks previously and no charge was brought by the disciplinary. A precedent was set,there were no directives from the RFL in the meantime, so why is the offence by a Catalan player deemed to be far more serious? This is at best incompetence, at worse corruption.

 

Completely agree.

 

Taylor didn't get a suspension because it wasn't worthy of suspension. If you view the incident carefully, O'Brien is actually knocked out by incidental contact with his own player's hip rather than the shoulder charge. The issue is the poor call in suspending Taia, not some paranoid and misguided anti Wigan drivel. Plenty of shoulder charges by most SL teams have had nothing more than a penalty this year.

 

Not sure how you can be so certain by how O'Brien was knocked out; are you a trained doctor or expert?! As for the misguided anti-Wigan drivel, I don't think anyone has suggested that; maybe you are being paranoid? People are concerned as Catalans are about the lack of consistency in RFL decisions.


Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#17 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,690 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 08:04 AM

This is not anti-Wigan drivel. If that was the case we would have been ranting after Taylor got no charge.

The point here is the blatant inconsistency of the RFL. Just put club loyalty aside (I know it's difficult ) and look at the two recent challenges. There is very little (nothing, in my view) difference between them.

#18 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 4,959 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 08:16 AM

This is not anti-Wigan drivel. If that was the case we would have been ranting after Taylor got no charge.

The point here is the blatant inconsistency of the RFL. Just put club loyalty aside (I know it's difficult ) and look at the two recent challenges. There is very little (nothing, in my view) difference between them.

 

Again, I completely agree.


Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#19 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,130 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 08:37 AM

Cracking little video, I've no sound but I imagine it's Edith Piaf playing.

 

Each one of those deserved a ban IMO. But still, it's nice to see Catalan have their priorities right, sod O'Brien who got hit, it's Taia who's the victim here. :rolleyes:


On Odsal Top baht 'at.


#20 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,179 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 09:02 AM

The shoulder charge seems to have worked up a lot of people. Not all high tackles see bans. Shoulder charges are the same - each will be judged individually.
There can be no automatic ban.