Jump to content

ban for ah van


Recommended Posts


It would have been 1 match but they added 4 to punish Betts.

Did he talk to the ref at half time?

 

Or Sky's Bill Arthur at full time?

 

I think we need to know.

 

:huh:

With Halloween coming up I decided to go to my local fancy dress shop to see if I could get a Dracula costume. After a few minutes the assistant handed me a Hull KR shirt asking "Is this suitable?", I replied "I think you may have misheard me, I said I wanted to look like a count."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 matches a bit harsh i thought it was a good tackle.

 

I think the extent of the ban is due to the resultant injury, that should not be taken into account, it is the intent that should be looked at. From what I saw Ah Van didn't seem to deliberately turn over the player but put in a good hard tackle that finished up going wrong.

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Betts?

 

Did the old man say follow Ah Van or something?  :ph34r:

 

Did you not see his post match analysis of the refs performance.

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the extent of the ban is due to the resultant injury, that should not be taken into account, it is the intent that should be looked at. From what I saw Ah Van didn't seem to deliberately turn over the player but put in a good hard tackle that finished up going wrong.

 

 

Saw the tackle on BBC today (thank you BBC in the south!).  Have to say thats the way I saw it to.

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the extent of the ban is due to the resultant injury, that should not be taken into account, it is the intent that should be looked at. From what I saw Ah Van didn't seem to deliberately turn over the player but put in a good hard tackle that finished up going wrong.

tbf the guidelines do have injury as an aggravating factor not intent. I tend to agree on the tackle but I think as it was a 1 on 1 tackle it is hard for ah van to say it was a controlled tackle. Nobody else was involved, often these tackles are a result of two defenders getting it wrong between them.

It certainly wasnt a normal tackle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

tbf the guidelines do have injury as an aggravating factor not intent. I tend to agree on the tackle but I think as it was a 1 on 1 tackle it is hard for ah van to say it was a controlled tackle. Nobody else was involved, often these tackles are a result of two defenders getting it wrong between them.

It certainly wasnt a normal tackle.

 

Sorry its my view that it shouldn't be taken into account if there is no intent. I don't think I made that clear.

 

If intent is shown, as in the retaliation later when Ah Van came back on and got smashed in the chops, if that had resulted in a broken jaw then the intent and injury should be considered.

 

I don't think there was any intent to turn the player over, it was, as I said earlier, a good hard tackle that went wrong (IMO).

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 matches a bit harsh i thought it was a good tackle.

Agreed. It was a brute of a tackle (but not, I think, malicious), and the guy did get hurt, but it isn't a 5-matcher in my opinion.

Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know where the panel are coming from, because we certainly don't want another Alex McKinnon. But 5 matches is a lot for what was obviously a technique issue rather than anything intentional. Plus you see guys flipped upside down every week and it never gets 5 matches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry its my view that it shouldn't be taken into account if there is no intent. I don't think I made that clear.

If intent is shown, as in the retaliation later when Ah Van came back on and got smashed in the chops, if that had resulted in a broken jaw then the intent and injury should be considered.

I don't think there was any intent to turn the player over, it was, as I said earlier, a good hard tackle that went wrong (IMO).

aye fair enough, I did think you may have been positioning it like that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can he appeal?

He's on the phone to Kooka$h right now, taking advice.

This world was never meant for one as beautiful as me.
 
 
Wakefield Trinity RLFC
2012 - 2014 "The wasted years"

2013, 2014 & 2015 Official Magic Weekend "Whipping Boys"

2017 - The year the dream disappeared under Grix's left foot.

2018 - The FinniChezz Bromance 

2019 - The Return of the Prodigal Son

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know where the panel are coming from, because we certainly don't want another Alex McKinnon. But 5 matches is a lot for what was obviously a technique issue rather than anything intentional. Plus you see guys flipped upside down every week and it never gets 5 matches.

The same disciplinary panel deemed a biting incident was worth 4 games - this is what I'm struggling to get my head around

I wouldn't mind so much if all tackles like this got 5 games - I saw a tackle by Dave Taylor where he was up right and the player was vertical (the wrong way) and only a caution was issued

I just struggle to see the difference - if somebody could explain maybe if accept it, but at the moment im just scratching my head

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will the Chairmen take the RFL Disciplinary on? Like many other long term fans of the game I thought it was a powerful tackle by Ah Van with no malice. He stopped the winger dead in his tracks with a perfect tackle technique.

The injury was unfortunate but irrelevant to the judgement,a lottery for the defending player.

Ah Van and Widnes are now denied the opportunity to play almost a quarter of the main reason....ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should have got 6 or the full 8!

It was a terrible tackle that could easily have been tragic had Gibson not broken his fall by getting his arm down ahead of his neck.

Great initial contact by Ah Van but the lifting and driving downward were totally unnecessary & unacceptable!

Aaron Heramia should also have been banned for a couple of matches, he's a lucky boy that he's escaped punishment.

Betts needs to rethink his strategy next time he coaches and winds his team up to cross the line in terms of physicality. It didn't work, Wakefield stood up to them and won the game playing fast free flowing Rugby League. Widnes on the other hand lost the game, lost a couple of players to suspension, lost the respect of a lot of people and Betts list any last semblance of credibility.

Additionally, Betts hypocricy in coming out slating the ref for penalising foul play after he'd sent his team out to play foul is laughable. The subsequent disgusting and disgraceful reaction of some Widnes fans, aimed at Ashley Gibson, has its catalyst in that Betts post match interview.

Dennis Betts should be ashamed of himself!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 games! It wasn't even worthy of a sin bin. The injury is just unfortunate. It's one of them things that happens in a contact sport.

No it's the result of reckless and careless technique which is the responsibility of the defender!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should have got 6 or the full 8!

It was a terrible tackle that could easily have been tragic had Gibson not broken his fall by getting his arm down ahead of his neck.

Great initial contact by Ah Van but the lifting and driving downward were totally unnecessary & unacceptable!

Aaron Heramia should also have been banned for a couple of matches, he's a lucky boy that he's escaped punishment.

Betts needs to rethink his strategy next time he coaches and winds his team up to cross the line in terms of physicality. It didn't work, Wakefield stood up to them and won the game playing fast free flowing Rugby League. Widnes on the other hand lost the game, lost a couple of players to suspension, lost the respect of a lot of people and Betts list any last semblance of credibility.

Additionally, Betts hypocricy in coming out slating the ref for penalising foul play after he'd sent his team out to play foul is laughable. The subsequent disgusting and disgraceful reaction of some Widnes fans, aimed at Ashley Gibson, has its catalyst in that Betts post match interview.

Dennis Betts should be ashamed of himself!

Any similar review of Scott Moore?

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.