Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

John Drake

17/07/14 - Leeds Rhinos v Castleford Tigers KO 8pm (TV)

Who will win?   11 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win?

    • Leeds Rhinos
      7
    • Draw
      3
    • Castleford Tigers
      1

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

311 posts in this topic

I'm not saying this as a Leeds fan, but because a non League person asked me this earlier and I thought it was interesting. Does anyone think, given that it was so out of character and Sinfield has a long, unblemished record, that there might be a case for a caution and a suspended ban? I'm sure I remember cases in the past where this has happened, where the next incident would get a longer ban as the suspended one could be added on. I suspect the new system of grading doesn't allow for this though.

I think, if I wasn't a Leeds fan, I'd have been cheering the sending off but in the calm of the following day would probably be thinking that was so out of character, hope he doesn't get a ban!

Having said that, I think Grade C, EGP 2 matches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it me or is Watkins doing nothing at the moment?

For his talent he seeks to hold back.

He had one big running chance at the end and just stopped to pass.

He may have been injured but over many games ive seen hes not the influence I thought he might be.

I think Watkins got injured at some point through the game last night and looked very laboured afterwards. However, I do get your point but I think Leeds are incredibly slow shifting the ball out to his position at the moment. They are utilising far too many dummy runners and passes round the back at times and it allowed last night for the Cas defence to shift across easily to cover any gaps; this happened on more than one occasion last night and is neutralising the effect of Watkins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit I thought it was the right call. The Cas dummy runner got himself in a position directly between the defender and the ball carrier and was 5 yards in front of the attacker, so it is his responsibility not to get in the way of the defender.

I can see why it was disallowed but that as got to be one of the softest obstructions ever. I think the try would have been scored regardless of the minmal contact and therefore should stand for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see why it was disallowed but that as got to be one of the softest obstructions ever. I think the try would have been scored regardless of the minmal contact and therefore should stand for me.

but Watkins got to the attacker a fraction too late meaning ignoring an obstruction that delayed the defender even by a fraction couldnt happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying this as a Leeds fan, but because a non League person asked me this earlier and I thought it was interesting. Does anyone think, given that it was so out of character and Sinfield has a long, unblemished record, that there might be a case for a caution and a suspended ban? I'm sure I remember cases in the past where this has happened, where the next incident would get a longer ban as the suspended one could be added on. I suspect the new system of grading doesn't allow for this though.

I think, if I wasn't a Leeds fan, I'd have been cheering the sending off but in the calm of the following day would probably be thinking that was so out of character, hope he doesn't get a ban!

Having said that, I think Grade C, EGP 2 matches.

You strike me as someone who approves of serious criminals being let out on day release & when they don't come back you shrug your shoulders and justify it.

4 match ban.

My daughter watched it & was upset by it - are you able to comprehend that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying this as a Leeds fan, but because a non League person asked me this earlier and I thought it was interesting. Does anyone think, given that it was so out of character and Sinfield has a long, unblemished record, that there might be a case for a caution and a suspended ban? I'm sure I remember cases in the past where this has happened, where the next incident would get a longer ban as the suspended one could be added on. I suspect the new system of grading doesn't allow for this though.

I'm struggling to think of a time when a player received a suspended ban due to previous good behaviour. Are you sure this was in Rugby League?

Are you seriously advocating that players can deliberately, illegally injure opposition players and potentially not have to pay the consequences?

Sinfield's head butt was not "accidental", it was intended, however saintly his playing record may be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how often do we hear coaches say that something awful was simply out of character, he's a good lad and woukld never do that sort of thing etc?

 

That would be like picking a player who has played really badly for many matches but had a great record in the past. That would never happen either, would it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guessing you haven't read my post properly. I said I thought it was an interesting question, actually raised by an American Footballer, I have no idea what their disciplinary procedures are. I didn't say I agreed with it.

I would have no problem whatsoever if whoever makes these decisions cites it as an aggressive act, as he was clearly wound up, surprised no-one has mentioned the obvious foul language prior to the incident. However, previous good records are often taken into account, and it clearly states that in the RFL document.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS I might be confusing suspended fines with suspended bans, I'm getting on a bit and I'm thinking 30 years ago!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet you read the Guardian.

;):biggrin:

 

The rest of the evidence would point to the contrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are apparently three kinds of headbutt, according to the RFL's disciplinary policy.

.

How many kinds of "throat grip" are there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

having seen the hedbutt now, i'd say it's a c. there's some fair old hyperbole on this here thread...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many kinds of "throat grip" are there?

Two. The one used by Peacock that is deemed to cause no harm or is somehow deserved by the recipient and receives no punishment, and those used by everyone else that will get the player sin binned or sent off. HTH :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just watched the match.

 

Admittedly, I'm not impartial, but to me a "headbutt" is a shorter, sharper motion than what Sinfield did. It did look to me as if Dorn may have been going to put his head in too (though didn't), and the intention was a butt of heads rather than a headbutt (if that makes sense)

 

I'd have it somewhere from A-C. Probably B/C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just watched the match.

Admittedly, I'm not impartial, but to me a "headbutt" is a shorter, sharper motion than what Sinfield did. It did look to me as if Dorn may have been going to put his head in too (though didn't), and the intention was a butt of heads rather than a headbutt (if that makes sense)

I'd have it somewhere from A-C. Probably B/C.

Totally agree, it wasn't your traditional "Glasgow kiss" style head butt but it was certainly aggressive.

I'd say 3 matches reduced to 2 with an EGP would be fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You strike me as someone who approves of serious criminals being let out on day release & when they don't come back you shrug your shoulders and justify it.

4 match ban.

My daughter watched it & was upset by it - are you able to comprehend that?

What actually upset her because I have seen a hell of a lot worse in my time watching Rugby League.

This while incident was laughable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What actually upset her because I have seen a hell of a lot worse in my time watching Rugby League.

This while incident was laughable.

It's about what affected her & how she felt about it. Not what anyone else thinks she should accept.

Anyone throwing their head in like like that is wrong and it will upset people wether it's on a rugby pitch or in the street - it deserves punishment.

We pride ourselves on being a family sport so lets not make the mistake of laughing it off.

My daughter gets the physical intimidation bit of our game - but doesn't like it when the pot boils over & players or supporters effectively break the law.

I respect that point if view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Catalans - Wigan game must have terrified her then.Given she doesn't like it when Players "effectively break the law".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it best to think of as more of a head-push than a head-butt . All being said and done - a 3 match ban and a hefty Club fine sounds like the best option. That will set an example to other players

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its my belief that Clubs need to come down heavier on players. If its hurts the Club, the club are more likely to take action against the player.

Fining the Club ensures that the Club Directors get onto the Manager and the Manager gets on to the Players to ensure they explain that this kind of behaviour cannot be tolerated. I believe that the Club and Club Manager also needs to take responsibiity.

 

Why not even find the Club Manager? That would be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That doesn't work.A similar system is used in the amateurs and it still happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Amatuers we're just talking about a £100 fine at most presumably. Thats not going to knock the socks of anybody though - lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Amatuers we're just talking about a £100 fine at most presumably. Thats not going to knock the socks of anybody though - lol.

It's enough for most amateur clubs!Yet it doesn't act as a deterrent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017