Jump to content

9 games for Acton


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, LeeF said:

So you think it was deliberate. Really? Giv up trying to defend the indefensible.  Acton is totally at fault. 

Bobruce posted " if it was accidental " , not as a question but as a statement , so , has he seen it ? , or does he have doubt ? 

The tackle was high , he contacted Reynolds face , so is Gregg Bird capable of something like that ? 

Given his other shennanigans during the match , yes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 230
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Bobruce posted " if it was accidental " , not as a question but as a statement , so , has he seen it ? , or does he have doubt ? 

The tackle was high , he contacted Reynolds face , so is Gregg Bird capable of something like that ? 

Given his other shennanigans during the match , yes 

Given Actons shenanigans all season then I can only assume he was attacking a prone player

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LeeF said:

The  ball had been kicked by Reynolds the split second before Bird tackled him.  That is not deemed a late tackle under the Laws of the game so stop making things up/ excuses for the thuggery of Acton

Show me the rule appertaining to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LeeF said:

The  ball had been kicked by Reynolds the split second before Bird tackled him.  That is not deemed a late tackle under the Laws of the game so stop making things up/ excuses for the thuggery of Acton

Without doubt Bird could claim he was committed to the tackle , the technique was distinctly poor , he did turn his head to the side just before contact 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dkw said:

On the end of his foot, go look for the video, educate yourself.

If you think that balls on the end of his foot,I suggest an eye test should be your next birthday present.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Given Actons shenanigans all season then I can only assume he was attacking a prone player

He attacked him ? , did he ? 

As I put earlier he's recieved one less game of a ban than Ben Flowers , now that was an attack , one that did finish somebodies career , one that included 2 punches , one on a player prone on the pitch 

Basically Bird knew exactly what he was doing , and was willing to get himself injured if neccessary ( Reynolds nose was already bleeding prior to this tackle ) to either intimidate or remove a key player from our team , he then fained injury to try to avoid getting punished for it ( something Sam Moa avoided later in the game because Leigh scored during the play ) 

Believe what you want , as will I 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

He attacked him ? , did he ? 

As I put earlier he's recieved one less game of a ban than Ben Flowers , now that was an attack , one that did finish somebodies career , one that included 2 punches , one on a player prone on the pitch 

Basically Bird knew exactly what he was doing , and was willing to get himself injured if neccessary ( Reynolds nose was already bleeding prior to this tackle ) to either intimidate or remove a key player from our team , he then fained injury to try to avoid getting punished for it ( something Sam Moa avoided later in the game because Leigh scored during the play ) 

Believe what you want , as will I 

So you can read minds now, sound ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Havenwarrior said:

Ironic that Acton was absent due to an injury in training. Seems to me they didn't want him there.

 

HW

He was stretchered off and taken to Hospital for an X ray , so just unfortunate timing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So now he has received a bigger ban than Ben Flower 

Quite ridiculous , they obviously have an agenda with both the club and player 

They have an agenda with the player, because he can't behave himself. And the club itself hasn't come out of this much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, snapski said:

They have an agenda with the player, because he can't behave himself. And the club itself hasn't come out of this much better.

Theres always somebody who will pay the dosh..The Club will continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So now he has received a bigger ban than Ben Flower 

Quite ridiculous , they obviously have an agenda with both the club and player 

It's not a bigger ban than flower, he was banned for 6 months which equated to 13 games

acton is banned for 4 months which will either be 10 or 11 games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, snapski said:

They have an agenda with the player, because he can't behave himself. And the club itself hasn't come out of this much better.

As I said , a bigger ban than Ben Flower , seriously ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Spidey said:

It's not a bigger ban than flower, he was banned for 6 months which equated to 13 games

acton is banned for 4 months which will either be 10 or 11 games

I was led to believe Flower missed 10 competitive matches , if I'm wrong then fair enough 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So now he has received a bigger ban than Ben Flower 

Quite ridiculous , they obviously have an agenda with both the club and player 

you and your colleagues have put some highly well reasoned, articulate, knowledgeable; knowlegeable in psychology, physiology, the dynamics of violence, and a deeply held and balanced sense of justice. and do you know what? I'm persuaded. your tautly written incisive last sentence brings everything together like an Amish barn raising.

just one question, because as you must realise by now, I'm stupid. Why do 'they' have an agenda against your club and this player? oh just another sneaky one if thats ok by you. Who are 'they'? The disciplinary panel? The RFL? Both of them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a rediculous ban,given the outcome of events. A players injury should be taken into account,those are the rules. Have they been followed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tongs ya bas said:

you and your colleagues have put some highly well reasoned, articulate, knowledgeable; knowlegeable in psychology, physiology, the dynamics of violence, and a deeply held and balanced sense of justice. and do you know what? I'm persuaded. your tautly written incisive last sentence brings everything together like an Amish barn raising.

just one question, because as you must realise by now, I'm stupid. Why do 'they' have an agenda against your club and this player? oh just another sneaky one if thats ok by you. Who are 'they'? The disciplinary panel? The RFL? Both of them?

Well you certainly have to wonder , I have to admit I find the disciplinary system in RL somewhat strange , the EGP system allowing lesser punishments , an offence is an offence , we recently have seen Ben Westwood recieve a yellow card and a 4 game ban for a spear tackle , and yet Paul McShane got no card and a 2 match ban for an identical offence , far too often similar or identical offences are punished drastically different 

The weekend before the recent International saw not one single player up before the panel , very convenient 

If we want parents to take their sons to play the sport , then deliberate acts of thuggery designed to injure players must be penalised properly and evenly 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.