[coley]

I do not think many folk care that much about my beloved Wigan

On this note, this is one of the reasons II get touchy when a thread becomes a Wire v Wigan thread. I actually have a lot of time for Wigan, they are my favourite rivals, and as a club they are an example for many others.

Unfortunately, your opinion can be dismissed simply because of the rivalry (which I appreciate I was guilty of with you - see above).

Saints are the ones who get to me!

[coley]

It was the "now that's a surprise" that was annoying. What was the point you were making?

I do not think many folk care that much about my beloved Wigan, but mine is a perfectly valid opinion, expressed as such. Other opinions are as valid as your own - mine is shared by others, Wiganers and non-Wiganers alike.

I agree with much else on the thread, but took a hugely disproportionate exception to that.

In that case, I sincerely apologise. It was said in jest, in a 'here we go down the Wire v Wigan route' that many of these threads go down whether we mean them to or not.

Didn't mean anything personal, it was purely based on the fact that you were a Wigan fan and I'm a Wire fan.

[2012 ASHES - and every 4 years beyond that]

I'd be happy for the Aussies to have a rest in 2012, it is their choice. It absolutely shouldn't be up to the RLIF to decide whether they play or not.

I don't believe other sport's governing bodies arrange the fixtures for their nations, apart from the major tournaments.

Everything else is invitational and arranged between countries I believe.

If the Aussies don't want to play, we should arrange a tour to New Zealand. We should play PNG to start, play the winners of the Pacific Nations Cup (other than PNG) at their place and three tests in NZ.

I'm happy to see the GB team used as a touring team.

[Eastmond could be sidelined for the season]

I think McNamara will probably go with Tomkins at 6 and Myler at 7.

As backup McGuire and also Widdop can cover 6 too along with Sinfield so there are options.

Brown and Pryce would be wildcards, both are not what you would say as top performers on a consistent basis.

Can't Brown cover centre as well? Maybe that will get him in the squad.

I think we should stop being worried about putting players in. As we saw last year, Tomkins and Eastmond did a great job, and I'm sure there are a few others out there that would do well given half a chance.

I'm not Brown's biggest fan, but I wouldn't be as upset now if he got in as I would have been 12m ago.

[Eastmond could be sidelined for the season]

Providing everybody remains fit and on form, then you would expect that the main players for the half positions would be Tomkins (at 6 or 7), with McGuire, Myler or Brown taking the other spot.

Then you have Pryce.

Either way, we don't need to go as low as Brough and Horne IMHO.

Whoever does well in the playoffs has the real advantage.

[coley]

My opiniom remains that Morley's tackle was dirtier and more dangerous. Plus he has more previous than Attila the Hun. I am not even complaining about Coley's sending off or his ban. And yet Wires make sneering, dismissive posts about my opinion while expressing their own views as gospels. It appears my opinion is shared by plenty of others, inc non Wigan fans, and hence objectively not bonkers.

If this had been an anti Wire thread one of them would have gone boo hoo and had the thing locked.

You think my initial response of:

Ah, now that's a surprise.

was sneering and dismissive? Really, good God!

How can somebody express their own view as Gospel? They are my views, I regularly use IMHO etc. but I am allowed to express them, and am allowed to challenge other people's.

There are plenty of people who think that O'Loughlin deserved a ban, in fact the furore it caused at the time was very similar to the Morley one, and guess what, it gets dismissed on here as a red herring.

I was happy to engage in decent discussion, see the posts with giwildgo, believe it or not, not everybody has an agenda, not everybody hates your beloved Wigan, and my original involvement in this thread was to highlight the fact that we get complaints about consistency whichever way it goes.

O'Loughlin gets let off - fans go mad saying there is favouritism to Wigan.

Coley gets a ban - fans go mad saying that Wigan are victimised.

The only consistent thing here is that the fans go mad, they really can't win.

Are you going to bang on about that thread getting locked in every thread? It is irellevant, God knows who reported it, and I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't even a Wire fan who did. I know I certainly didn't and from knowing other Wire fans style on here, I would be stunned if they complained about it!

[coley]

Sorry Dave, but the O'Loughlin thing has always been a red herring.

There was nothing in that tackle, and most people can see that.

I'm concerned that you can't see the wrong in Morley's "tackle", but if you haven't seen it, you haven't seen it.

Think what you want, there was an awful lot of debate about the O'Loughlin tackle, just like there was the Morley tackle.

People wanted them both stringing up, yet the panel found them both innocent, that is why there is a similarity.

I'm sure you think I am taking the P about the Morley thing but I am 100% genuine in saying I have not seen a close up or a decent angle, as most of the cameras had moved on with the ball. This was the reason I asked for any links or evidence, as I am suspecting I have genuinely missed something with the way everybody is going on.

I know when people were making stuff up about the Hudds disallowed try at Wembley last year, Sam came on with photo evidence showing the players arm on the ground, I thought somebody (who is more techically minded than me) may be able to do the same, or may have been able to at the time. The fact is that there is no benefit to me sticking to my guns on this one, if Morley did something, so what, me seeing a camera angle that proves it and changing my opinion is not now going to get him a ban! I'm not even saying he didn't foul the player, I am saying there was no decent camera angle (and the panels words back that up).

There really isn't much more I can say about that incident, I watched the match back after the event, and IMHO it didn't show a good angle, certainly no close up. I was interested to see if I had missed an angle, yet people put that down to bias, then fine.

[SoOGB]

Yorkshire, Lancs, Cumbria and an All Stars XIII (which could be made up of the other counties, plus overseas players to make them competitive).

Why not have a draw for the two semis and then have a double header for the finals and 3rd v 4th.

[coley]

So now we are at the point whereby we agree with every decision that the panel makes?

It seems to me that it suits you to agree with the one regarding Morley.

If you actually read the whole thread, and weren't just a wind-up merchant you would see that I actually started off in a thread stating that I thought the panel was right and had no issues with them, in a thread that was nothing about Morley.

Naturally, a Wigan fan threw a couple of Wire incidents my way to challenge the consistency thing, and that is how we got to Morley.

I also supported the panels decision on O'Loughlin and Peacock, how does that fit into the whole Warrington thing?

I get sick of week in week out people complaining about inconsistency from both refs and the panel, when on here none of us can agree. Forget the Morley incident (I am being genuine when I say I haven't seen a camera view that shows anything worthwhile), and let's talk about the O'Loughlin incident.

It was a Wigan player and he was slaughtered by most on here and in the post-match interview with Brown. The panel take the emotion away and look at things for a good while with loads of camera angles where available. Sure I have no doubts that they make mistakes, but your argument that I am biased towards Wire was actually nothing to do with this thread, and I was defending the panel and process well before Wire were thrown into the mix (like you will often find me doing on ref threads).

[coley]

Has anyone else agreed with your, completely unbiased, assessment of the Morley incident?

I demand that, if you are to pass judgement on Coley, you put a link up to the video in this thread. I also demand that you post video evidence of every other case you have stated on here. I mean, without video evidence, how are we to deem that anything is inconclusive?

Yes, the disciplniary panel.

Both games were live on Sky so video evidence was used and in one case was conclusive, not so in the other.

All the incidents I have discussed have video evidence and we have seen them on TV. I genuinely must have missed the clip which shows this horrific Morley incident (and so did the panel it seems).

[coley]

How come your opinion always sides with Wire's point of view?

Is it merely a coincidence?

Stop it Dave, you're killing me.

How come you ignore examples of me defending other clubs and players? My defence here is actually of the panel, and I also use an example of a Wigan player who was absolutely slated on here and by a top coach.

Why did you ignore that? Is it merely a coincidence?

If I say something against my club, people like you aren't queuing up to say anything, so I can't really win.

Of all the incidents that have involved my team on this thread, I said Carvell deserved a ban, Morley's was inconclusive (same as the panels), and I haven't seen the Brent Webb tackle against the Wire player.

I'm still waiting to see this TotalRL exlusive video of the Morley incident.

[coley]

Is it really a surprise?

According to you Coley's ban was a slam dunk, and the evidence against Morley was "Inconclusive".

Time to open both eyes Dave, just like you seem to be preaching to everyone else.

Where do I preach for people to open both eyes? I give my opinion, you should try it some time, instead of just lying in wait for snide remarks.

If you lok at Coley's ban in isolatio I think it's about right but. however, incinsistency reigns again because, and Sorry dave T, the attack by Morley on Sherwin was worse in my opinion and I THINK Morley has a much poorer disciplinary record.

If anybody can show me the Morley incident I would be happy to review it again and stand corrected. I watched it after the event and because the ball had gone the best camera angle was a long shot which was inconclusive.

The inconclusive thing isn't something I have made up, these are the panels words:

The committee have scrutinised DVD very carefully. There was a collision and committee are not satisfied this could have been avoided. The committee are also not satisfied the initial contact was high but was towards the upper part of the body. The player

[coley]

I don't necessarily expect you to agree with me, its all about opinions isn't it?

Absolutely, and I wasn't challenging you for the sake of it, I was genuinely interested in the examples you would come up with, thanks for taking the time to do that (although I'm sure it's no surprise to you that I don't agree with them all!!!)

Nevertheless examples;

http://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=1600 - Grade C (2-3 matches) becomes nothing despite being found guilty?

This is one that was looked at in a lot of detail. I had no issue with a ban, however at the time some people were hysterical about it, and it wasn't as bad as people made out. I would have agreed that 1 match is about right, as ultimately the players have a responsibility to play in a way that doesn't cause injury.

http://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=1922 - Worse high tackle than Coley's (in my opinion), not sent off and a poorer previous record - same outcome as Coley

I haven't seen this as obviously it wasn't on TV, is there a link to it anywhere? It's be unfair of me to comment otherwise.

http://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=1596 - One of the most reckless tackle attempts I have seen all season and found not guilty.

There are hundreds of people who also acted this hysterically about the O'Loughlin one at Murrayfield, however when people actually look at it frame by frame in slow motion (which the panel do) then it isn't as clear cut as fans would suggest. I have still yet to see a good angle of this, and by the wording the panel use, they didn't get an angle which many fans on here seemed to get which showed a shocking tackle! Again, if anyone has any links of this, I'd love to see it.

http://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=1953 - Contact with head not careless? There was a swinging arm to the head about 2 minutes later that was even worse and wasn't even deemed worthy of review.

I genuinely don't think there was anything in this at all. I remember I was watching this game in the pub with my dad and at first we both thought it was a red card. When you watched it again in slow mo, it was just a spectacular looking tackle. Look at the fact that it was a flat hand, and he had been stepped by a player two-thirds his weight and there was nothing in it.

http://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=1705 - Different offence but example of leniency in spite of poor previous record for same offence and admittance in guilty verdict of potential to seriously injure.

Can't disagree and this is probably the one time I have criticised the disciplinary this season.

I stand by my view that lack of consistency is a real issue.

My final point is though that you have failed to supply high tackles where the ball carrier has been knocked unconscious and had to leave the field as a result. All of the above incidents are for very different things, so of course you won't get consistency.

Nobody agrees. I take it you thought there was no issue with O'Loughlins 'tackle' on Robinson? Despite Nathan Brown (recognised as a top coach in SL) thinking it was disgusting and threatening retribution!

With such varied views on exactly the same incident, how on earth can the panel win?

[coley]

peacock has been cited three times in the last 12 months for high tackles and recieved no bans. go figure.

Figured it. The tackles weren't very bad. Who did Peacock knock unconscious?

[coley]

I have seen worse without players being banned and plenty of them. I thought Morley's attack on Sherwin was the dirtiest piece of play I have seen this year, but as I recall there was no action taken there.

That said, it is hard to argue with the sending off and a 2 match ban doesn't seem ridiculous. I would be surprised if there was a deliberate anti-Wigan policy among the Disciplinary panel, but we seem (without my doing any analysis) to have attracted far more than our share of cards and bans. There is perhaps a subliminal "not them again" reaction to our being top of the league again.

If we push Mossop up to prop for part of the 2 games he misses we won't notice Coley's absence. He can be effective but can also make costly mistakes. We aren't particularly reliant on one player, though if Tommy, Lockers and Sam were all out at the same time we might struggle to adjust.

Ah, now that's a surprise.

IIRC the camera angles were inconclusive to say the least.

Any more? I am genuinely interested in these lists of high tackles that knocked the player out and made him leave the field concussed.

[coley]

Seen plenty as bad this season with the player staying on the field and not getting a ban at the disciplinary. Consistency is a problem. 2 matches was the maximum ban for the grade of high tackle, generally you see partial deduction on the maximum for the sending off and a partial deduction for pleading guilty, even taking into the balance the previous warnings and a ban (for an entirely different offence), I'd have expected a match less than the maximum. It was a poor effort and reckless, but it sets a precedent that I don't think the RFL will follow or have previously to date.

The RFL might not have it in for Wigan, but I think our recent record for cards and bans compared to other teams completely dispels some people's perception that Wigan are or ever have been untouchable.

I disagree again.

Which ones do you feel were as bad? It would be interesting to compare what the RFL said about them in comparison.

[coley]

if all that is true how come peacock got nowt for taking tomkins high and then smacking him on the back of the head for good measure.

Because it really wasn't that bad.

Are we just gonna go through every high tackle against your team now.

This is pretty much what I said would happen in my earlier post. Every high tackle is different. The one on Tomkins looked bad until you saw the replay and then you realised it wasn't that bad at all.

[coley]

Seems to be a bit excessive in comparison to the consideration by the disciplinary of other mistimed high tackles in the last couple of seasons. A sending off and one match would have been about par.

Not sure I agree tbh. 1 match would generally be for careless, whereas this was classed as reckless. The write-up on the RFL website has it spot on IMHO (including the fact that Coley pleads guilty - although I don't buy his account as a 100% accurate representation).

As is pointed out, the tackler was in control, and it wasn't a mis-timed tackle, he had the whole body to go at, and he got it wrong. The fact that the player was injured showed how much force he put into it (considering it wasn't a massive swinging arm - it was just very solid to the head).

The main thing I was disappointed with over this was Coley's reaction when he got the Red card, but then he does have a habit of appealing even when he has given a blatant penalty anyway...

[coley]

I wouldn't be surprised to see an appeal to get him back for the semi but IMHO 2 is fine.

what semi?

Sorry, meant the Wigan v Wire game. At the same time I was also reading that Higham will miss the semi final!!!

[coley]

coley got a 2 match ban today, seems a bit harsh to me, and will now miss the wire game, meanwhile micky higham breaks thumb and will be out for a month, players seem to be dropping like flies at the mo'.

I think 2 matches is about right. I thought it was quite a bad high tackle. Nothing too OTT, but the player went down like a sack of $hit. There was also no need for it as it was from a slow tap penalty so Coley wasn't even wrong footed.

I wouldn't be surprised to see an appeal to get him back for the semi but IMHO 2 is fine.

No doubt we will simply get a load of posts where people say 'I don't mind him getting a ban, as long as there is consistency!'.

The funny thing with consistency is that on the Wigan board there are a few fans being hysterical saying that the ref brought the game into disrepute with the farcical decision to red card him, whereas other Wigan fans are saying it was the right decision!

[Warrington Wolves v Castleford Tigers]

Think it'll be a relatively close one for a while, with us perhaps pulling away later on, maybe by 18.

We weren't overly impressive against Crusaders, but are still tough enough to win games like that, which is pleasing.

Hopefully Morley will be back, and Carvell and Myler have another game under their belt, so we may get to look a little slicker.

[Chanting by Rhinos supporters]

Yet according to the Guardian Gareth Thomas never noticed it?

Don't read the Guardian mate. He told Mark Chapman a couple of weeks ago what the chanting was.

He said when he heard it it hurt him.

He said him and the players discussed it and how hurtful it was in the changing rooms after the game.

I haven't read everything on it, but these are things I have watched him on TV saying.

[Chanting by Rhinos supporters]

Agreed - I'm sure they hear worse than "we can see you holding hands" too so am I righ tin thinking that you disagree with the Castleford fine earlier this week and the RFL should get real?

There was worse than that chanted at Gareth Thomas.

[Cas to appeal and rightly so!]

The bit about the MC not being called to give evidence is absolute rubbish. He was called and explained to them that he hadn't heard it but then he was standing in the tunnel area and there was a lot going on around him to drown out any external noise.

This is one of the key areas that concerns me about their statement. They are making out it was some kind of travesty that a person who had heard or seen nothing wasn't called as a witness!

Ref's miss all sorts on the field but people still get cited for things afterwards. Do people who subsequently get banned then call the ref to their defence in the appeal because he didn;t see anything, so therefore he hadn't done anyting?

[Cas to appeal and rightly so!]

Obviously it was a joke FFS!!

Apologies, obviously I haven't got used to your posting style yet, maybe the odd smiley would help!