Jump to content

This week's disciplinary...

Dave T

By Dave T
in The General Rugby League Forum

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Wollo Wollo Wayoo

Wollo Wollo Wayoo

Posted
Posted

RFL don't want to deprive Saints of Walsh and Thompson until after the Wigan game.

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

 

 

Saint Toppy

Saint Toppy

Posted
Posted

They are being held tonight. The independent judge was taken ill yesterday.

You mean the Ex-Wigan player on the panel this week was taken ill. They needed him available to ensure both miss the Wigan game so they postponed the hearing until tonight  ;)

St.Helens - The Home of record breaking Rugby Champions

 

Just Browny

Just Browny

Posted
Posted

If I were an ex-Wigan player I'd be as keen as possible for Thompson to play.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.

Old Frightful

Old Frightful

Posted
Posted

Dave05 will be along shortly to give you lot detention.

                                                                  :kolobok_sad:   Hull FC....The Sons of God....  :kolobok_sad:
                                                                     (Well, we are about to be crucified on Good Friday)
Saint Toppy

Saint Toppy

Posted
Posted

If I were an ex-Wigan player I'd be as keen as possible for Thompson to play.

Why ?

After a series of niggling injuries and operations over the last 18 months Thompson is starting to get back to the form he showed in 2014

St.Helens - The Home of record breaking Rugby Champions

 

Old Frightful

Old Frightful

Posted
Posted

Keiron Cunningham on the Sky coverage and their comments about the Walsh tackle:

 

"It's no coincidence that one of them's an ex-Wigan player and we play Wigan next week. 

"I’ve never seen at the end of the game how we can highlight one tackle for five or 10 minutes and somebody try and compare it to a tackle where somebody dislocates and need surgery on there shoulder.

"I can't understand that but then like I said it is an ex-Wigan player, and we are playing Wigan this week and I'm sure it would suit him if Luke Walsh didnt play."

 

So, does Cunningham seriously think that the RFL Disciplinary hang on every word Phil Clarke, Eddie, Stevo, etc, say and then are influenced enough to bring a harsher penalty on Walsh because of it?

                                                                  :kolobok_sad:   Hull FC....The Sons of God....  :kolobok_sad:
                                                                     (Well, we are about to be crucified on Good Friday)
Dave T

Dave T

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well let's look at the Sky panel...

Clarke, McDermott, O'Connor, Carney... what do they have in common?

Now, where's that 'walks away whistling' smiley?

Old Frightful

Old Frightful

Posted
Posted

Well let's look at the Sky panel...

Clarke, McDermott, O'Connor, Carney... what do they have in common

That's a toughie mate....

Is it that they all talk boll ocks?

                                                                  :kolobok_sad:   Hull FC....The Sons of God....  :kolobok_sad:
                                                                     (Well, we are about to be crucified on Good Friday)
Saint Toppy

Saint Toppy

Posted
Posted

Somehow, I think this thread will be busy later on.

I don't think there will be too many Saints fans complaining if Walsh does cop a ban. Even though he released the player and didn't follow through with the tackle he still put him in a dangerous position.

The one fans are most peed off with is the Thompson charge. Even if they deem it to be a shoulder charge then it was still only shoulder to shoulder with no head contact which is just an on-field penalty. The head clash was purely accidental (they can't claim he lead with his head and also accuse him of a shoulder charge). Banning a player for a shoulder to shoulder contact or an accidental head clash would be farcical.

St.Helens - The Home of record breaking Rugby Champions

 

Lowdesert

Lowdesert

Posted
Posted

I don't think there will be too many Saints fans complaining if Walsh does cop a ban. Even though he released the player and didn't follow through with the tackle he still put him in a dangerous position.

The one fans are most peed off with is the Thompson charge. Even if they deem it to be a shoulder charge then it was still only shoulder to shoulder with no head contact which is just an on-field penalty. The head clash was purely accidental (they can't claim he lead with his head and also accuse him of a shoulder charge). Banning a player for a shoulder to shoulder contact or an accidental head clash would be farcical.

What if it was a deliberate head clash?

Dave T

Dave T

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I don't think there will be too many Saints fans complaining if Walsh does cop a ban. Even though he released the player and didn't follow through with the tackle he still put him in a dangerous position.

The one fans are most peed off with is the Thompson charge. Even if they deem it to be a shoulder charge then it was still only shoulder to shoulder with no head contact which is just an on-field penalty. The head clash was purely accidental (they can't claim he lead with his head and also accuse him of a shoulder charge). Banning a player for a shoulder to shoulder contact or an accidental head clash would be farcical.

shoulder charges to any part of the body are banned. If that shoulder charge led to a player getting injured then he can have few complaints facing a charge.
Ullman

Ullman

Posted
Posted

Two match bans for both Walsh and Thompson.

"I'm from a fishing family. Trawlermen are like pirates with biscuits." - Lucy Beaumont.

Griff9of13

Griff9of13

Posted
Posted

Both pleaded not guilty. Both give 2 match ban. :rolleyes:

"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Dave T

Dave T

Posted
  • Author
Posted

All Clarkey's fault.

When we see coaches defending foul play like this I think we have a real issue.

dkw

dkw

Posted
Posted

Both pleaded not guilty. Both give 2 match ban. :rolleyes:

Should have tried pleading guilty, that seems to work better.

Davo5

Davo5

Posted
Posted

shoulder charges to any part of the body are banned. If that shoulder charge led to a player getting injured then he can have few complaints facing a charge.

Come on now Dave,don't let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory,Old Forgetful will get another 20 posts out of this.

Futtocks

Futtocks

Posted
Posted

This week's disciplinary panel: Shaun Wane, Maurice Lindsay, Beelzebub and the ghost of Osama bin Laden.

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

Lowdesert

Lowdesert

Posted
Posted

All Clarkey's fault.

When we see coaches defending foul play like this I think we have a real issue.

Unfortunately some coaches are taking this route. Glad it's not all.

Yes, Walsh realised his mistake, but he put him up in the air, so he pays the price. Think it would have been better not to defend it. Difficult to agree with the 'but he wasn't hurt' principle.

Teessidewire

Teessidewire

Posted
Posted

Unfortunately some coaches are taking this route. Glad it's not all.

Yes, Walsh realised his mistake, but he put him up in the air, so he pays the price. Think it would have been better not to defend it. Difficult to agree with the 'but he wasn't hurt' principle.

The problem with Walsh is that having put the player in the air, he then dropped him. Thompson made a shoulder charge and caused an injury. No point in him saying that he didn't mean to injure the player, he did an illegal act and caused injury.

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • 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.