Disciplinary - Ben Currie

[Dave T]

Apologies if I have missed this but he has been charged Grade C for touching the ref. Watched the incident back (62nd minute) and it doesn't look good. I hope the club plead guilty and give him a rollicking.

 

Interesting that in recent weeks we have gone from having no bans to three (Westwood, England and Currie) - with two of them quite unsavoury. 

 

I hope the club clamps down on this kind of behaviour - and tbh I'd like to see the refs really start to clamp down on player interaction during the game. Currie was bad enough for putting two hands on the ref, but the ref didn't seem concerned with this - it was when he then pushed him that Silverwood gave him daggers - but still didn't have a word with him. As soon as hands go anywhere near a ref it should be a yellow at least. There is no reason or defence for touching a ref.

[Exiled Wiganer]

If you go back a couple of minutes, you can see Hock having a word - all I could catch from my lip reading classes was "... warm spell... holiday... larging it... a shove should do it...".

[Just Browny]

Completely agree. I haven't seen the incident back but there's no place for it.

[Dave T]

Completely agree. I haven't seen the incident back but there's no place for it.

When you watch it it is relatively minor, but petulant, and shouldn't be happening at all. He puts both hands on the ref, one on his shoulder and one on his back as he speaks to Silverwood, and then when he goes behind him he gives a small push in the back.

 

The hands were bad enough, the push should be a red and a ban for me.

[Dave T]

Guilty Plea - 2 match ban

[wackojacko]

Lenient IMO. Do refs need more self-respect?

[Saint Toppy]

I see Saints have challenged Greenwoods charge of a grade C challenge on Kevin Brown. The disciplinary charged him with the same offence as Sneyd the week before.

Saints have said that Browns ankle injury was sustained in an earlier tackle with Masoe (which it was) and wasn't caused by Greenwoods tackle, and that the turning movement of both players was in the same direction and in a continuous motion (unlike Sneyd's where the 'twist' was in the opposite direction).

There will now be an independant hearing later this evening

[Dave T]

I see Saints have challenged Greenwoods charge of a grade C challenge on Kevin Brown. The disciplinary charged him with the same offence as Sneyd the week before.

Saints have said that Browns ankle injury was sustained in an earlier tackle with Masoe (which it was) and wasn't caused by Greenwoods tackle, and that the turning movement of both players was in the same direction and in a continuous motion (unlike Sneyd's where the 'twist' was in the opposite direction).

There will now be an independant hearing later this evening

I seem to recall Brown being upset by a tackle during the game, the commentators mentioned him being protective of his ankle - was this the Greenwood one?

 

I don't think it is a defence that the player wasn't injured is it?

[Exiled Wiganer]

I heard Brown's ankle was broken, indeed the whole foot was now back to front and he walks round in circles. Hang him!

[Saintslass]

I seem to recall Brown being upset by a tackle during the game, the commentators mentioned him being protective of his ankle - was this the Greenwood one?

 

I don't think it is a defence that the player wasn't injured is it?

Dunno, but the fact that Brown was already injured prior to the tackle made by Greenwood shouldn't be reason to charge someone either.  I'm not saying that is what has happened here but it shouldn't.  Brown was injured when making a tackle on Mosoe and foolishly he chose to stay on the pitch.  That isn't Greenwood's responsibility and he shouldn't be punished for it. 

[Dave T]

Dunno, but the fact that Brown was already injured prior to the tackle made by Greenwood shouldn't be reason to charge someone either. I'm not saying that is what has happened here but it shouldn't. Brown was injured when making a tackle on Mosoe and foolishly he chose to stay on the pitch. That isn't Greenwood's responsibility and he shouldn't be punished for it.

well that isnt why theyve charged him. They have charged him for an illegal tackle.

[LeeF]

Apologies if I have missed this but he has been charged Grade C for touching the ref. Watched the incident back (62nd minute) and it doesn't look good. I hope the club plead guilty and give him a rollicking.

 

Interesting that in recent weeks we have gone from having no bans to three (Westwood, England and Currie) - with two of them quite unsavoury. 

 

I hope the club clamps down on this kind of behaviour - and tbh I'd like to see the refs really start to clamp down on player interaction during the game. Currie was bad enough for putting two hands on the ref, but the ref didn't seem concerned with this - it was when he then pushed him that Silverwood gave him daggers - but still didn't have a word with him. As soon as hands go anywhere near a ref it should be a yellow at least. There is no reason or defence for touching a ref.

Great post

Only 1 question. Why didn't Silverwood take action at the time?

[Dave T]

Great post

Only 1 question. Why didn't Silverwood take action at the time?

he looked a bit puzzled as though he didnt know what had happened, but he should have at least had a word for the hands on if nothing else.

[RidingPie]

I remember Hock once, at Wigan got sent off and banned for putting his hand in the ref in a none aggressive manner (I know he did far worse later). He got sent off instantly and I think (though in not certain about this) he got a 5 match ban. I thought that was fairly lenient at the time. This seems almost ridiculously so.

[Saintslass]

well that isnt why theyve charged him. They have charged him for an illegal tackle.

I didn't know crocodile tackles were illegal.  See them in a lot of matches.

 

Anyway, the disciplinary panel have found him not guilty of a Grade C dangerous tackle or whatever Grade C it was he was charged with.  Good.  Because he wasn't guilty of anything other than making a reasonable tackle.

[Dave T]

I remember Hock once, at Wigan got sent off and banned for putting his hand in the ref in a none aggressive manner (I know he did far worse later). He got sent off instantly and I think (though in not certain about this) he got a 5 match ban. I thought that was fairly lenient at the time. This seems almost ridiculously so.

iirc, hock pulled the ref back as he was jogging away

[Phil]

It's time the refs in the pro game started acting on this and on verbals they're badly letting down their colleagues in the amateur game.

[Old Frightful]

I seem to recall Brown being upset by a tackle during the game, the commentators mentioned him being protective of his ankle

It was Peacock who mentioned about being protective of an ankle and using it as an excuse for kicking out.

 

He seemed fluent in the topic, can't think why. 

[RidingPie]

iirc, hock pulled the ref back as he was jogging away

That's not how I remember it. He put his hand on his shoulder as he turned away. He certainly wasn't jogging at the time. Either way that was the point I personally didn't want Hock at Wigan any more. Even after his previous antics.

[RLDave]

I thought he was pushing his luck at the time. I wouldn't have thought twice but I saw the refs face and rewound it and it was a bit of a shove. No harm intended by it but certainly over the line.

[Guest]

I didn't know crocodile tackles were illegal.  See them in a lot of matches.

 

Anyway, the disciplinary panel have found him not guilty of a Grade C dangerous tackle or whatever Grade C it was he was charged with.  Good.  Because he wasn't guilty of anything other than making a reasonable tackle.

 

 

The reason behind the not guilty charge by the RFL is probably going to cause them some trouble in the future. They have basically said, yes it was accidental so that's fine, not guilty.

 

"MRP feel the second rolling is a conscious movement-player had the opportunity to release- undue pressure applied- twisting movement-actions had potential for serious injury."

 

Surely Sneyd could have argued the same?

[bobbruce]

The reason behind the not guilty charge by the RFL is probably going to cause them some trouble in the future. They have basically said, yes it was accidental so that's fine, not guilty.

"MRP feel the second rolling is a conscious movement-player had the opportunity to release- undue pressure applied- twisting movement-actions had potential for serious injury."

Surely Sneyd could have argued the same?

I'm sure he did argue the same.

[Exiled Wiganer]

In the wake of spitting and ref handling, Sims looks to be in trouble for his heroic attack on young British stand off Williams in Warrington's easy win last week. I know it caused outrage at the time (surely some mistake?) but I wondered whether Wire are going for a full set of banned forwards. Indeed, Clarke was charged for the same incident... 4 down, 2 to go.

[Dave T]

I think Sims should plead guilty. Clarke should appeal imho.

[Saint Toppy]

Sims pleaded guilty and took the EGP - got 1 match ban

Clarke pleaded guilty and took the EGP - No ban

Hardaker charged with Grade B (1-2) - No EGP available to him

Mickael Simon charged with Grade B (1-2) - No EGP available to him

Mickey Paea charged with Grade C (2-3) - No EGP available to him