Danny Bridge - disciplinary

[roughyed34]

Now as I have previously said you can't defend the incident at all and a ban was inevitable.

On the referees side he has made a right meal of it all in his submission to the RFL,it shouldn't have happened but he is definitely dining out on it.

Referees are God on the pitch and therefore untouchable and quite rightly so but the RFL insist refs do no wrong,their performances are not even reviewed. If players are getting so frustrated with officials maybe it is only fair if refs are assessed after every game in any other walk of life you would be sacked/suspended for poor performance but in RL it seems like refs can do what they like with no comeback. 

So all in all, it's a sad time for Bridgey and the club. It's happened. No point crying over spilt milk, I'm sure the club will deal with it as they see fit. People saying he should be banned for life perhaps have a point but the disciplinary committee handed down the sentence they deemed appropriate. It's not for us to judge what happens next. Done the crime he will now do the time. 

If Bridgey stays with us or moves on after his punishment, I still wish him well.

[roughyed34]

Fair point.

Im sure there is no ref assessor at League 1 matches, or even a match commissioner. I could be wrong. All im saying is that the RFL need to work harder with refs to make decisions on the pitch more consistent, that is what frustrates players and fans more than anything, the way the RFL basically hush up incidents is incredible - see the NW v Hunslet drop goal farce for example- if NW hadnt asked for a review from Ganson, Sweet wouldnt have even been pulled up on it!

Part of the problem is the lack of "spare" refs, they cant drop or suspend refs for errors because there simply are not enough to go round.

Refereeing is not easy, its a thankless task and without them we have no game....but the RFL need to look at ref performances across the leagues in much more detail imho and somehow persuade more people to take up reffing, ex players i feel could contribute a lot to the game in a refereeing capacity.

[herbie]

If Danny had been disputing a decision and then attacked then i agree with those that say he should be banned for life.

The incident in question as too many grey areas in my opinion. I really  dont believe for a minute his actions were premeditated.

He probably took advice and pleaded the way in did in ordet to reduce the ban.

Again in my opinion Dannys well being should be taken into account and he should be supported by the club.

Hopefully the referee will recieve the support he needs from the RFL.

[Stevos Barber]

1 hour ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Roughyed34 ... Again, not being involved with it all, but I do know there are assessors at EVERY match in every division. You are perfectly correct about the lack of officials but the trouble with ex-players doing in - as in every sport, not just RL - is that after they have finished playing they are often too old to actually start refereeing in time for them to progress through to the top level ... you can't just throw a newcomer into even Division 1 without having learnt what to do. Furthermore, would players want to do it for the less money they would get in comparision to playing ?

The other code did with Glen Jackson

[R0ughyeds]

 

[Bedford Roughyed]

17 hours ago, roughyedspud said:

Going off the grainy video...it appears to me that he thought the ref was a keighley player trying to support the keighley player who broke away..and he took him out....that kinda thing happening in most games..

Thats the way I read it when I saw the video.  

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

3 hours ago, R0ughyeds said:

 

Danny, if you read this - I know you're not that sort of player. I believe what you say in your statement. Keep your chin up. Good luck for the future - from a Hornet.

[roughyedspud]

17 hours ago, RL does what Sky says said:

roughyedspud ... I cannot agree with your view of the incident, especially as the ref's shirt was a completely different colour to the Keighley ones.  Yet even if your view is correct and Bridge thought the ref was a Keighley player supporting his colleague with the ball, Bridge still deserves severe punishment for doing that to an opponent, especially one who was not in possession. Furthermore, when you say "that kinda thing happening in MOST games", I can honestly say that in MOST games I have watched I have hardly ever seen a referee being even tackled in a proper manner by a player never mind being "taken out".

I never said In most games a refs get taken out..you know full well I meant players taking players out...stop being a troll...

And bridge's statement confirms my take on it..in the heat of the moment he thought it was a keighley player...and yes of course he deserves a ban..a couple of weeks at least.. 4-6 week at most...I'd definitely appeal 9months!!!

[moorside roughyed]

All I'd say to him is"you've been a wally and you know it. Everyone makes mistakes, it's about learning from them and setting better examples in the future". Good luck for the future mate,beit with Oldham or anyone else.

[roughyedspud]

Players get taken out/tackled off the ball in most games....

[Tony Mac]

Is there somewhere I can watch this?

[R0ughyeds]

5 hours ago, Tony Mac said:

Is there somewhere I can watch this?

Click on play button

https://twitter.com/seriousaboutrl/status/1021833676064268288?s=21

[Pigeon Lofter]

Sometimes it's about optics.....what it looks like for those on the outside.

I stopped every attachment I had to the Latics when they looked like they were signing a pariah player who was seen by many to be an abuser of women. I have no doubt many others thought that if this is what the football club is about,then I'm having nothing more to do with them. And I've kept that way..cut all connections because they represent a standard of behaviour I find abhorrent. I bet I'm not the only one who moved away after that disgraceful episode in the recent history of Latics.

Same here though with this event. I've seen the clip over and over. If Oldham are so desperate to support a player who decks a referee then thats it for me too. They don't deserve my support in any shape or form if their standards are that low. And again,there will be others who think like me.

Imagine how this is being talked about in passing conversations in pubs,factories or building sites where people chew the fat. An Oldham Rugby League player flattened the referee in a game they were losing....and the club might play him in the future. What impression does that give for the club or even the sport? I'll tell you : a terrible one,and one that decent people wan't no part of. The player pleaded guilty....he did what he was accused of. It's not why he did it (that's always going to be an unknown) but the fact that he broke a golden rule of sport in such a public setting.

If he is re-signed,then it's a nail in the coffin of Oldham Rugby. How many more nails before the death certificate is written?

Not many. It's in ICU as it is.

 

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

The RFL and an independent panel deemed 9 month and £75 fine sufficient punishment. Are you saying they are wrong? That when he's 'done his time's he should be further punished?

[Pigeon Lofter]

12 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

The problem is that the media want sensational news thesedays and a headline of "Player hits referee" is certainly that, irrespective of the full circumstances surrounding it. Therefore those talking about it in the pub are doing so only on the sensationalism of the information the newspapers give them.

Yep,agreed.

How many parents would want their son playing League if they hear tales of a referee being laid out by a player? How many people would want to pay to watch a sport where players assault the referee? To support the player in this is absolutely terrible for the game of RL and for the image of the club. He did it...time to get rid and let him restart somewhere else with a clean sheet.

I really believe the fans on here can't see the bigger  picture. It looks disgraceful from a distance.

In my day,RL had the reputation of foul play whereas Union was the gentlemans game. That analogy is a thing of the past but wouldn't an incident like this resurrect that idea? 

 

[roughyed34]

Is that the same player at Latics who was cleared of any wrongdoing in the retrial (Ched Evans)? Yet I assume you followed Latics when Lee Hughes was there-jailed for a drunken car crash that killed a man before Latics signed him? Was that abhorrent, signing him and why didn't that warrant your retraction of support? 

Bridgey made a mistake, has been punished by the sports governing body and will resume after his suspension. Looks like any excuse from you to put the boot in on players of either team and an excuse to walk away from both. Take the moral high ground by all means but he who casts the first stone etc. I guess you have never made any mistakes in your life? Plenty of players in football and rugby and other sports have done shocking things also,Cantona, Di Canio,Flower,Bishop,Houston (on more than one occasion with refs) , drugs cheats etc but continued their careers after their punishment

If Oldham resign Bridgey I'm sure plenty will welcome that decision after a belting season from the lad.

Read the forums and social media, plenty are saying the lad made a mistake, some say he should be banned for life. He had a moment of madness,the lad deserves a second chance.

Get off your moral high horse, use the incident positively to reinforce to kids that this is not the way to behave and the punishment you get for it,instead of condemning a bloke who has a previous unblemished disciplinary record to the RL scrapheap.

 

[Pigeon Lofter]

1 hour ago, roughyed34 said:

 Take the moral high ground by all means but he who casts the first stone etc. I guess you have never made any mistakes in your life? 

 

Read the forums and social media, plenty are saying the lad made a mistake, some say he should be banned for life. He had a moment of madness,the lad deserves a second chance.

 

Get off your moral high horse, use the incident positively to reinforce to kids that this is not the way to behave and the punishment you get for it,instead of condemning a bloke who has a previous unblemished disciplinary record to the RL scrapheap.

 

Of course we've all made mistakes. Lamping a referee though? I'd pack in playing if I'd done stuff like that. What was his excuse....that he intended to assault an opposition player off the ball who wouldn't have expected a head shot and so couldn't defend himself? 

Second chance? Of course,with another club. A clean sheet as his legacy at Oldham has been corrupted. Might be harsh on the player but would be good PR to pass on re-signing him. The club would get respect for that, IMO.

I don't have a moral high horse to get off. I'm a decent family bloke who believes in doing stuff the right way and not rewarding lowlife behaviour. I'm also not so obsessed with a local sports team that I would lower my standards just because someone wears an Oldham shirt.

Let's agree to disagree. I can see your point,but hold a completely different one.

[roughyed34]

But it was acceptable for you to support a killer at Latics then,rewarding lowlife behaviour,what was his excuse, one for the road? Let's just clear that up before we agree to disagree? That was the first point of your post that you quit Latics because of a moral issue, but find Bridgeys offence worse and would withdraw support because of it?? 

Answer that point and I will agree to disagree, until that point is addressed I'm afraid your stance about Danny holds little water for me. Pot,kettle,black.

I don't lower my standards because he is an Oldham player either, I stated he should be banned for his actions but when he finishes his punishment he is free to continue his career with Oldham or any other club without prejudice.

[exrlref]

One person in all this saga has been overlooked and that is the referee. As a referee who was hospitalized because of a player's action I can give first hand knowledge. The referee has job that players and spectators alike love to have a go at and think they can do a better job,but offer them the whistle and they're gone. No referee goes out on a match day to get players banned. They are there so the game of rugby league can take place. Take them away and low and behold no game no rugby league.

If a referee is assaulted as I was and and the one Bridge took out on his own admission then in my oppinion that player should be banned from the game. I may add that the player who assaulted me appealed and his ban was doubled (by BARLA).from ten years to twenty years.

After the assault it took a long time to be fully committed to the game again as each game on the whistle was one of apprehention as to what would happen,I was always looking out for the player who thought he was being badly done too. My worry was that if these players are allowed to play again what if they come up against a young up and coming referee, will the player take advantage of that referee and make his life hell so that referee walks away from the game thus one less referee that the game is crying out for.

I strongly disagree with you Roughyed34 Bridge should not be allowed to play again. He knew what he was doing and I think it was only by luck that the referee was not badly injured. Bridge might come over as a nice person but it is in his make up to assault because things are not going his way.

Perhaps roughyed 34 would change his view if he was on the receiving end of the assault that Bridge did.

[roughyed34]

So by the same token Exref then Houston of Widnes should have been banned for life for twice contacting referees ,but wasn't. 

As I have said the ban is warranted and has been handed down by the governing body. That's the end of that imho. When his suspension is up he is free to do whatever he chooses.

I wouldn't change my opinion either. Bridge has made a statement putting his side forward,how do you know he knew what he was doing? Do the crime,serve the time and move on.

The referees health of course is also important and referees should never be touched. Think you are blowing it way out of proportion with the "by luck the ref wasn't badly injured" Bridgey pulled him back (admittedly round the neck) , he didn't punch/kick/knee him multiple times, it doesn't justify the incident but the Houston/Bentham second incident was worse as an "assault" on the ref. Bentham has not reffed since,only video ref.

Your calling for Bridge to be banned for life but other incidents have been as bad and players have got less than Danny.

 

 

 

 

[clifford]

I thought Houston got off extremely lightly, when you consider he'd done it before and against the same Phil Benson. 

I have seen the video and I felt it was in excusable. 

I defended one player at a disciplinary for putting a hand on a ref and he got 6 months reduced from 9 months. 

For me he got a small ban but once he has done his time he should be allowed back

[The Baron Mk11]

On 7/26/2018 at 2:13 AM, RL does what Sky says said:

roughyedspud ... I cannot agree with your view of the incident, especially as the ref's shirt was a completely different colour to the Keighley ones.  Yet even if your view is correct and Bridge thought the ref was a Keighley player supporting his colleague with the ball, Bridge still deserves severe punishment for doing that to an opponent, especially one who was not in possession. Furthermore, when you say "that kinda thing happening in MOST games", I can honestly say that in MOST games I have watched I have hardly ever seen a referee being even tackled in a proper manner by a player never mind being "taken out".

You know what he means....players taken out off the ball is a regular occurence in all RL games, and if you havn't seen it...your facing the wrong way. Danny Bridge had a cracking disciplinary record ...up until this brain fart. End of. I'd call you sanctimonious if I could spell it.

[The Baron Mk11]

5 hours ago, exrlref said:

One person in all this saga has been overlooked and that is the referee. As a referee who was hospitalized because of a player's action I can give first hand knowledge. The referee has job that players and spectators alike love to have a go at and think they can do a better job,but offer them the whistle and they're gone. No referee goes out on a match day to get players banned. They are there so the game of rugby league can take place. Take them away and low and behold no game no rugby league.

If a referee is assaulted as I was and and the one Bridge took out on his own admission then in my oppinion that player should be banned from the game. I may add that the player who assaulted me appealed and his ban was doubled (by BARLA).from ten years to twenty years.

After the assault it took a long time to be fully committed to the game again as each game on the whistle was one of apprehention as to what would happen,I was always looking out for the player who thought he was being badly done too. My worry was that if these players are allowed to play again what if they come up against a young up and coming referee, will the player take advantage of that referee and make his life hell so that referee walks away from the game thus one less referee that the game is crying out for.

I strongly disagree with you Roughyed34 Bridge should not be allowed to play again. He knew what he was doing and I think it was only by luck that the referee was not badly injured. Bridge might come over as a nice person but it is in his make up to assault because things are not going his way.

Perhaps roughyed 34 would change his view if he was on the receiving end of the assault that Bridge did.

That high horse your on keeps getting higher.

[roughyed1064]

barron Mk11, your spot on with your comments.

[moorside roughyed]

1 hour ago, The Baron Mk11 said:

That high horse your on keeps getting higher.

And higher.