Protecting the "little" players.

[hindle xiii]

You're not one-eyed at all. It was the bell end who started the thread. I should have quoted him. Soz.

I wondered that afterwards...!

[hindle xiii]

I thnk you're confusing me with someone else, Ed sommert or other perhaps?

This guy?

Don't want to get on the wrong side of him, he's quackers...

[amm]

never mind protecting the little players, who's going to start protecting stuart 'christ, i cost loads' fielden.

he does a damsel in distress so well

[3owls]

You're not one-eyed at all. It was the bell end who started the thread. I should have quoted him. Soz.

I'm a bit disappointed in you old lad, i thought maybe you were the one wigan fan that would rise above juvenile name calling when somebody passes comment on wigan and you're not in agreement. I won't bother retaliating in the name calling stakes because thats something i did about forty years ago in the playground. There were plenty of hits throughout the game and a few of them were a little late, the reason why i highlighted this particular incident was because of the sheer malice involved. Have a look again if you've taped it, the view from behind the sticks is the most incriminating. Myler is layed on his back with the ball grounded and tomkins is at least three or four yards away and not committed to the tackle at that point. What he does next is cowardly and dangerous, and i'm sure the disciplinary panel will vindicate my opinion they dish out the ban. He'll get away with a similar incident in the last minute when he came in late as the 3rd man on an already grounded westwood because his swinging arm missed and layed out fielden instead. I'm afraid your views are beginning to echo those of most wigan fans on here who seem to think their players should be free from criticism when they are clearly in the wrong.

[Exiled Wiganer]

That has really made me take stock of myself. Who am I turning into? What have I become? You have truly held a mirror up to me and I cannot believe what I have seen in it. How can I ever repay you?

I don't suppose you have Peacock's attack on Sam somewhere, as it would be good to hear your perspective on that.

[Padge]

I'm afraid your views are beginning to echo those of most Wigan fans on here who seem to think their players should be free from criticism when they are clearly in the wrong.

I'm afraid you are talking ######, you opened a thread titled ...Protecting the 'little' players. You then cited one single incident in a game full of incidents. Why did you choose to ignore the other incidents in the same game, why not, as EW points out, mention Peacocks attack on Tomkins as another example.

You got rumbled immediately and people didn't play and now you're sulking, you'll get over it.

[tonyXIII]

I'm afraid you are talking ######, you opened a thread titled ...Protecting the 'little' players. You then cited one single incident in a game full of incidents. Why did you choose to ignore the other incidents in the same game, why not, as EW points out, mention Peacocks attack on Tomkins as another example.

You got rumbled immediately and people didn't play and now you're sulking, you'll get over it.

You sure of that?

[Padge]

You sure of that?

I like to give BoD.

[3owls]

I'm afraid you are talking ######, you opened a thread titled ...Protecting the 'little' players. You then cited one single incident in a game full of incidents. Why did you choose to ignore the other incidents in the same game, why not, as EW points out, mention Peacocks attack on Tomkins as another example.

You got rumbled immediately and people didn't play and now you're sulking, you'll get over it.

To answer you and your over defensive mate there are a couple of differences between thug tomkins and the peacock tackle.

A. Peacock was tackling one of the most elusive players in S.L at full speed who he caught with an open hand,

Tomkins was assaulting a player laying prone on the floor with his forearm in a cowardly premeditated assault.

B. Peacock is a great ambassador for the game with an excellent disciplinary record who is well respected by his fellow players and opposition supporters (except one eyed wigan fans),

Tomkins is a walking ASBO that just happens to play rugby league with a chequered disciplinary record in his short career. You just have to look at his gormless face to see there's not a lot happening behind the eyes.

There you go, that was easy wasn't it? I'm sure you could have worked that one out for yourselves.

[hindle xiii]

To answer you and your over defensive mate there are a couple of differences between thug tomkins and the peacock tackle.

A. Peacock was tackling one of the most elusive players in S.L at full speed who he caught with an open hand,

Tomkins was assaulting a player laying prone on the floor with his forearm in a cowardly premeditated assault.

B. Peacock is a great ambassador for the game with an excellent disciplinary record who is well respected by his fellow players and opposition supporters (except one eyed wigan fans),

Tomkins is a walking ASBO that just happens to play rugby league with a chequered disciplinary record in his short career. You just have to look at his gormless face to see there's not a lot happening behind the eyes.

There you go, that was easy wasn't it? I'm sure you could have worked that one out for yourselves.

A. You made a decent point.

B. You ###### all over any credibility of the first point.

[Padge]

To answer you and your over defensive mate there are a couple of differences between thug tomkins and the peacock tackle.

A. Peacock was tackling one of the most elusive players in S.L at full speed who he caught with an open hand,

Tomkins was assaulting a player laying prone on the floor with his forearm in a cowardly premeditated assault.

B. Peacock is a great ambassador for the game with an excellent disciplinary record who is well respected by his fellow players and opposition supporters (except one eyed wigan fans),

Tomkins is a walking ASBO that just happens to play rugby league with a chequered disciplinary record in his short career. You just have to look at his gormless face to see there's not a lot happening behind the eyes.

There you go, that was easy wasn't it? I'm sure you could have worked that one out for yourselves.

But you started a thread about protecting players, though you seem only interested in one incident.

Should players be protected from the likes of Peacock Morley and Anderson or is this just a campaign against one player. If it is the latter then I suggest you should change your misleading topic title.

You've been ruuuummmmbbbbled

[hindle xiii]

But you started a thread about protecting players, though you seem only interested in one incident.

Should players be protected from the likes of Peacock Morley and Anderson or is this just a campaign against one player. If it is the latter then I suggest you should change your misleading topic title.

You've been ruuuummmmbbbbled

Ed the duck is back!

[3owls]

But you started a thread about protecting players, though you seem only interested in one incident.

Should players be protected from the likes of Peacock Morley and Anderson or is this just a campaign against one player. If it is the latter then I suggest you should change your misleading topic title.

You've been ruuuummmmbbbbled

It doesn't matter who the player is but for the worst tackles when there isn't a shadow of doubt there was malicious intent to cause serious injury lengthy bans should be forthcoming. The worst "tackle" last night by a country mile was joel tomkins. Late, premeditated, cowardly and in front of the sky cameras means that tomkins will be receiving a ban for sure, whether the R.F.L cite any other incidents during that game is open to debate. It's not about a person, it's about a tackle. The only time anybodys character should be put under the microscope is when they have previous, in this case tomkins has been cautioned twice already this season and i'm sure that won't help his case. By the way did you see him knock fielden out whilst trying to decapitate ben westwood (also on the deck)? Brave lad.

[Padge]

It doesn't matter who the player is but for the worst tackles when there isn't a shadow of doubt there was malicious intent to cause serious injury lengthy bans should be forthcoming. The worst "tackle" last night by a country mile was joel tomkins. Late, premeditated, cowardly and in front of the sky cameras means that tomkins will be receiving a ban for sure, whether the R.F.L cite any other incidents during that game is open to debate. It's not about a person, it's about a tackle. The only time anybodys character should be put under the microscope is when they have previous, in this case tomkins has been cautioned twice already this season and i'm sure that won't help his case. By the way did you see him knock fielden out whilst trying to decapitate ben westwood (also on the deck)? Brave lad.

I didn't realise that you work for the disciplinary, you have full access to the facts already. The video from all angles, the referees report and the match commissionaires report. What you saw is only what you saw.

Now about changing the topic title so that you don't cause any confusion about what your thread is really about...

[3owls]

I didn't realise that you work for the disciplinary, you have full access to the facts already. The video from all angles, the referees report and the match commissionaires report. What you saw is only what you saw.

Now about changing the topic title so that you don't cause any confusion about what your thread is really about...

It helps when you watch the game through TWO eyes. Goodnight.

[Padge]

It helps when you watch the game through TWO eyes. Goodnight.

It helps when you are willing to accept the decisions of the officials and/or the disciplinary if they adjudicate.

IF Tomkins is pulled I will accept the outcome, will you.

Now about this misleading topic title, when are you changing it to reflect your real issue.

You've been rruuuummmmbbbeeeeeelllllllllllled.

[Hannibal]

Nathan Brown had his say a couple of months back but it would appear nothing has changed on the evidence of last night. Last nights wigan v wire game was a classic for R.L fans with some huge hits but one cowardly act soured it for me. If Joel Tomkins gets away with anything less than a 4 match ban for his thuggish late elbow into Mylers face then the R.F.L aren't serious about protecting our fine young talents. A big hit face to face is one thing but coming four yards to drop into someones face when they can't protect themselves is totally unacceptable. It's now or never for the disciplinary panel to lay down a marker and protect talents like Myler.

I read the whole thread to see if you had any relevant points to make.

I should have just read your first post and said the following. ###### off.

[Hannibal]

And just a point of order.

Morley hit the kicker late at least 4 times last night.

To be honest, he just looks too lazy to get back into the defensive line, so he takes two steps forward and barges the kicker.

However, as someone on here has been claiming that Tomkins has got previous, then I don't consider it churlish to mention that no-one in SL has more previous than Morley.

Let's not worry about the truth though.

[Dave T]

Disappointed, although not surprised with some of the responses.

The three late hits were penalised, and will get no further action. Anyone who can defend the O'Loughlin tackle and then moan about Morley or Carvell last night seriously needs their brain checking! I agreed that the O'Loughlin tackle was no big deal, but then certain people who agreed seem to now struggle now it was against their precious players!

As for Tomkins, like I said earlier, I was disappointed with it, and I didn't think there was any need, but let's see what the panel do, and I will accept that.

PADGE - One quick question - you are great with the rules, what are the rules around theextra penalty after the try? Is it if there is a foul prior to the try, and the fact that Myler had scored and play was technically dead a factor? Thanks in advance!

[Hannibal]

Disappointed, although not surprised with some of the responses.

The three late hits were penalised, and will get no further action. Anyone who can defend the O'Loughlin tackle and then moan about Morley or Carvell last night seriously needs their brain checking! I agreed that the O'Loughlin tackle was no big deal, but then certain people who agreed seem to now struggle now it was against their precious players!

As for Tomkins, like I said earlier, I was disappointed with it, and I didn't think there was any need, but let's see what the panel do, and I will accept that.

PADGE - One quick question - you are great with the rules, what are the rules around theextra penalty after the try? Is it if there is a foul prior to the try, and the fact that Myler had scored and play was technically dead a factor? Thanks in advance!

You can get as precious as you like, but I was there, and Morley was deliberately targeting the kicker time after time.

Are you happy with that? You seem to be happy with any tactic that Wire come up with, yet squeal like a pig when someone tries it against you.

Try watching the game, instead of getting so excited about your 3D specs that you are only watching one side.

[sam]

You can get as precious as you like, but I was there, and Morley was deliberately targeting the kicker time after time.

so was i, you're right he targetted the kicker...who should he have targetted? the waterboy? stadium announcer? the fans? the car park attendants?

[Dave T]

You can get as precious as you like, but I was there, and Morley was deliberately targeting the kicker time after time.

Are you happy with that? You seem to be happy with any tactic that Wire come up with, yet squeal like a pig when someone tries it against you.

Try watching the game, instead of getting so excited about your 3D specs that you are only watching one side.

Ha ha, you are showing yourself up big time! You love to come on here all high and mighty, yet as soon as you lose a game, you act like a little girl. Where have I squealed like a pig? Seriously, quote me, as you are almost as mental as Paris and Lobby - I must admit to wondering whether you are all the same person!

You love to make out everyone else is a ##### and against your beloved Cherry and Whites, when in fact, you are clueless, and prove it time after time, despite very rarely giving your opinion in favour of attacking posters.

[HappyDave]

Yeah, Joel Tomkins' late tackle was terrible but if he's pulled up in front of a disaplinary hearing so should Carvell for about 3 or 4 high tackles/off-the-ball charges & also that thug Cockayne for starting the biff unnecessarily.

[Padge]

PADGE - One quick question - you are great with the rules, what are the rules around theextra penalty after the try? Is it if there is a foul prior to the try, and the fact that Myler had scored and play was technically dead a factor? Thanks in advance!

An eight point try can only be awarded if the try scorer is fouled during the act of touching down not in any subsequent period.

However you have fallen for the OP's intention here, he claimed to want a discussion about protecting ALL 'little' players, which some of us have offered to discuss. However it turns out that really he wanted to hid behind a misleading topic title in order to pretend he was being fair when really he wanted to discuss one particular incident in a game of many.

I suggest the OP changes the topic title to avoid confusion. Meanwhile I have to assume he wants an open discussion about all the incidents recently which are covered by his topic title.

So what about Anderson deliberately and dangerously going head first into a tackle to attempt to dislodge the ball, surely leading with the head is as dangerous as leading with the elbow.

[Hannibal]

so was i, you're right he targetted the kicker...who should he have targetted? the waterboy? stadium announcer? the fans? the car park attendants?

Sam, it's against the rules to touch the kicker after the ball has gone.

Has that bit passed you by?

With regards to your comment regarding stadium announcers, etc, if I understood what you were talking about, I would respond.