Discipline

[Sir Jekyll Stocking]

In the last three matches we've had three sin-binnings, a sending off and I hate to think how many stupid penalties that have cost us yards (and occasionally tries against).

Does anybody know if the club sanctions players guilty of these misdemeanours?

 

And on a related topic, what happened in the incident that led to the Swinton Scrum-half having to leave the pitch?

The referee awarded a penalty (but what for is anybody's guess - I never saw  signal) and put the incident on report - suggesting he was unsighted, yet saw enough to award a penalty. A more cynical observer may suspect a referee unwilling to fill out additional paperwork at the end of the match to justify another sending off/sin-binning.

[BatleyBird]

Whatever it was, the Swinton fans at that end were furious. 

[phildog]

They seem to be pointing an accusing finger at either Alex Brev or Dom, both of whom it is suggested were 'on the scene' but Swinton fans were actually unable to accuse anyone with any certainty, one suggesting that Brev was goading the injured player to get up and stop faking which I would doubt as I wouldn't say that he was the type, and we do havexa couple who are! I agree though, discipline itself isn't winning us any friends let alone games. I think Rettie was a little unfortunate as it depends on whose opinion you rely as to what is a shoulder charge and what isn't ( and it used to be a legal move done correctly). If you lead into a tackle with your shoulder down, as used to be the ideal method in coaching manuals, are you now going to get sent off? At what point does contact with an opponent become a shoulder charge? Too much is left to one man's view, which might be different to a different ref a week later. However, the team warnings and niggles can be addressed and need to be.

[Bat Lad]

There's an accusation of knees to the head, but what I saw was the Swinton player bang his head hard on the ground. 

[silverback]

i hope there is an highlights clip as it were nowt,just a late-ish flop when it looked like the swinton player was going to try get nearer line as he were only half tackled,hope the lads ok mind.

 the elbow on smeaton in tackle off knowles that touchie started to go pitch for was worse,ref waved him away and they went on to score.

[DOGFATHER]

 

On 22/04/2019 at 21:23, Sir Jekyll Stocking said:

In the last three matches we've had three sin-binnings, a sending off and I hate to think how many stupid penalties that have cost us yards (and occasionally tries against).

Does anybody know if the club sanctions players guilty of these misdemeanours?

 

And on a related topic, what happened in the incident that led to the Swinton Scrum-half having to leave the pitch?

The referee awarded a penalty (but what for is anybody's guess - I never saw  signal) and put the incident on report - suggesting he was unsighted, yet saw enough to award a penalty. A more cynical observer may suspect a referee unwilling to fill out additional paperwork at the end of the match to justify another sending off/sin-binning.

Are we an undisciplined side though SJS?

Here are the details of the last 12 disciplinary incidents (not including the 2 dreadful decisions by Crashley in the Toulouse match, that were so bad he didn't even file them to the RFL). 

If, as you point out, we are an undisciplined team, why have so many incidents resulted in a "no charge" decision?

Toby Everett	Batley	07/04/2019	No charge	ON/489/19	VIEW DETAILS
Tom Lillycrop	Batley	10/03/2019	No charge	ON/294/19	VIEW DETAILS
Dane Manning	Batley	01/03/2019	No charge	ON/236/19	VIEW DETAILS
Dane Manning	Batley	01/03/2019	No charge	ON/238/19	VIEW DETAILS
Louis Jouffret	Batley	03/02/2019	Charge	ON/078/19	VIEW DETAILS
James Brown	Batley	20/01/2019	No charge	ON/030/19	VIEW DETAILS
Lewis Galbraith	Batley	20/01/2019	No charge	ON/032/19	VIEW DETAILS
Toby Everett	Batley	20/01/2019	No charge	ON/033/19	VIEW DETAILS
Lewis Galbraith	Batley	20/01/2019	No charge	ON/035/19	VIEW DETAILS
Jovilisi Taira	Batley	06/01/2019	Charge	ON/010/19	VIEW DETAILS
Louis Jouffret	Batley	26/12/2018	No charge	ON/003/19	VIEW DETAILS
Lewis Galbriath	Batley	23/09/2018	No charge	ON/1228/18

[distantdog]

13 minutes ago, DOGFATHER said:

 

Are we an undisciplined side though SJ?

Are you suggesting we are the subject of a conspiracy against us? (I notice your edit by the way) I think we are getting punished rightly or wrongly, and it is harming us! We need to be smarter in our conduct on the field and not give referees the opportunity to sanction us! An example of lack of smartness was Ward getting sin-binned against Dewsbury, in the first tackle (I think) after a team warning was given. I also think JC was extremely lucky not to be sin-binned for a high tackle soon after the above incident. 

We just need to be smarter. I think many of the incidents tend to be careless rather than malicious.

[DOGFATHER]

1 hour ago, distantdog said:

Are you suggesting we are the subject of a conspiracy against us? (I notice your edit by the way) I think we are getting punished rightly or wrongly, and it is harming us! We need to be smarter in our conduct on the field and not give referees the opportunity to sanction us! An example of lack of smartness was Ward getting sin-binned against Dewsbury, in the first tackle (I think) after a team warning was given. I also think JC was extremely lucky not to be sin-binned for a high tackle soon after the above incident. 

We just need to be smarter. I think many of the incidents tend to be careless rather than malicious.

I'm not saying it is a conspiracy, but I find it amazing how incorrect decisions happen against certain teams with such regularity.

If it was just Batley on the wrong side of the officials each week, it could well be biased viewing on my part. I am in no way a Huddersfield, Salford or Wakefield fan though, but every time I see games involving them on TV, they are always on the thin end of 50/50 decisions too, especially when they are playing one of the bigger more fancied teams. 

I have a warning point for my opinions of the officials, the edit to my original post was to ensure I am being less inflammatory and hopefully safe from further warnings.

Whichever way you cut it though, 2 out of the last 14 disciplinary incidents have resulted in a "no charge" decision by the panel. To me, an undisciplined side would have a charge rate much higher than 15%.

However, I totally agree with you regarding being smarter. We are a pretty dumb side, in many ways. I admire the fact when we play the better sides, that we do not resort to the tactics of Rochdale and Swinton of a couple of seasons ago. As we found against them, resorting to laying down at every verse end is a very effective way of negating an a opponents superior fitness. 

I have seen the changes below on the ourleague app, let's hope it helps the officials to make more correct decisions. However, I would be very surprised if these new interpretations, do not mirror those of ball stealing, in other words a complete lottery and very easy to interpret incorrectly.

The following additions / amendments to 2019 referee policy have been introduced with immediate effect:

Placing the ball on the defender lying on the ground – It is the responsibility of the player playing the ball to place the ball on the ground at their feet. If necessary the player should step backwards to ensure this can be done. OUTCOME – If the ball is placed on the tackler, this will be ruled a knock-on.

Moving off the mark / stepping over to deliberately place the defender in the ruck - It is the responsibility of the player playing the ball to place the ball on the ground at their feet, and not to advance off the mark - if necessary the player should step backwards. OUTCOME – The player in possession will be penalised for moving off the mark if deliberately stepping over a defender to place them in the ruck.

Playing the ball into a defender in the ruck – The player playing the ball should maintain balance and control when heeling the ball to the acting half-back.OUTCOME - In this situation the player in the ruck will be penalised if hit by the ball - or if in the opinion of the referee the half-back is prevented from picking the ball up. EXCEPTION – A penalty will be awarded against the player playing the ball if the ball is forcibly heeled back with the intention of contacting the defending player with the ball.

Passing into an opposing player – Any ball passed into an opposing player in and around the ruck, in any direction, will be deemed to be acting against the spirit of the game. OUTCOME - The passer will be immediately penalised.

Steve Ganson, the RFL’s Head of Match Officials, explained: “A number of high-profile incidents during and before the Easter weekend have shown certain teams or players acting contrary to the spirit of the game, in a manner that has infuriated fellow professionals, broadcasters and, crucially, supporters.

“After internal consultation, we have therefore decided to make these changes to referee policy with immediate effect, applying throughout the game. This is an unusual step, but not unprecedented – and we hope it will be welcomed by coaches, players and supporters.

“There is a meeting of head coaches next week, followed by the regular meeting of the RFL Laws Committee, at which these matters will be discussed, along with the situation regarding obstruction which has also been provoking a lot of discussion.”

[Sir Jekyll Stocking]

14 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

 

Are we an undisciplined side though SJS?

Here are the details of the last 12 disciplinary incidents (not including the 2 dreadful decisions by Crashley in the Toulouse match, that were so bad he didn't even file them to the RFL). 

If, as you point out, we are an undisciplined team, why have so many incidents resulted in a "no charge" decision?

Toby Everett	Batley	07/04/2019	No charge	ON/489/19	VIEW DETAILS
Tom Lillycrop	Batley	10/03/2019	No charge	ON/294/19	VIEW DETAILS
Dane Manning	Batley	01/03/2019	No charge	ON/236/19	VIEW DETAILS
Dane Manning	Batley	01/03/2019	No charge	ON/238/19	VIEW DETAILS
Louis Jouffret	Batley	03/02/2019	Charge	ON/078/19	VIEW DETAILS
James Brown	Batley	20/01/2019	No charge	ON/030/19	VIEW DETAILS
Lewis Galbraith	Batley	20/01/2019	No charge	ON/032/19	VIEW DETAILS
Toby Everett	Batley	20/01/2019	No charge	ON/033/19	VIEW DETAILS
Lewis Galbraith	Batley	20/01/2019	No charge	ON/035/19	VIEW DETAILS
Jovilisi Taira	Batley	06/01/2019	Charge	ON/010/19	VIEW DETAILS
Louis Jouffret	Batley	26/12/2018	No charge	ON/003/19	VIEW DETAILS
Lewis Galbriath	Batley	23/09/2018	No charge	ON/1228/18

Well, three sin-binnings and a sending off in the last three matches doesn't look like a terribly disciplined team, does it?

Whether the Disciplinary Panel deems "Sending off / sin-binning sufficient" is a different matter.

I was wondering if there were any financial disincentives for these misdemeanours. A 12.5% reduction in a player's match fee (to be shared out amongst team-mates) might be appropriate for a sin-binning, as he's been unavailable for an eighth of the match...

I don't think we're a 'dirty' team, by the way. But many of the penalties that are needlessly given away are pretty infuriating!

[DOGFATHER]

4 hours ago, Sir Jekyll Stocking said:

Well, three sin-binnings and a sending off in the last three matches doesn't look like a terribly disciplined team, does it?

Whether the Disciplinary Panel deems "Sending off / sin-binning sufficient" is a different matter.

I was wondering if there were any financial disincentives for these misdemeanours. A 12.5% reduction in a player's match fee (to be shared out amongst team-mates) might be appropriate for a sin-binning, as he's been unavailable for an eighth of the match...

I don't think we're a 'dirty' team, by the way. But many of the penalties that are needlessly given away are pretty infuriating!

I quite agree with you, it doesn't look very good, and we are certainly not a team that is skilled in the art of gamesmanship. Maybe other than playing the ball in to the man on the floor. 

It is the inconsistencies between decisions that I find hard to fathom. Take Sunday's game for example, we played the ball in to the defender left in the ruck on 3 occasions, we received a penalty for the first and were deemed to have knocked on for the other 2, yet there were no differences between the 3 incidents. Both sides were a little guilty of laying on in the tackle, but we were the only team penalised for it.

The sin-binning was only due to Fairclough play acting, he was caught with a lazy arm, but it was no worse than any of Sean O'Loughlin's normal tackles. Campbell got 2 far worse ones against Donny, but they didn't get a card for them. Yet, we do it and we are sent to the sin bin.

As soon as the card was shown on Sunday, Fairclough rose like Lazarus.

Taira was binned against Doncaster, but there were 5 challenges much later on Yates the previous week, but no cards were shown.

Rettie's red was no worse than the yellow card in the Hull derby. I just feel we are not getting the rub with the officials.

[Blind side johnny]

18 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

I'm not saying it is a conspiracy, but I find it amazing how incorrect decisions happen against certain teams with such regularity.

If it was just Batley on the wrong side of the officials each week, it could well be biased viewing on my part. I am in no way a Huddersfield, Salford or Wakefield fan though, but every time I see games involving them on TV, they are always on the thin end of 50/50 decisions too, especially when they are playing one of the bigger more fancied teams. 

I have a warning point for my opinions of the officials, the edit to my original post was to ensure I am being less inflammatory and hopefully safe from further warnings.

Whichever way you cut it though, 2 out of the last 14 disciplinary incidents have resulted in a "no charge" decision by the panel. To me, an undisciplined side would have a charge rate much higher than 15%.

 

Sorry DF but your analysis is scientifically very poor. Without comparing these figures with those for all other Championship clubs it demonstrates nothing other than a persecution complex. I haven't done such an analysis but a cursory glance through the outcomes from the disciplinary committee meetings published in LE each week shows that the vast majority of cases result in either no additional sanction or no case to answer.

I recommend looking at the data first before deciding upon your conclusions.

[DOGFATHER]

35 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

Sorry DF but your analysis is scientifically very poor. Without comparing these figures with those for all other Championship clubs it demonstrates nothing other than a persecution complex. I haven't done such an analysis but a cursory glance through the outcomes from the disciplinary committee meetings published in LE each week shows that the vast majority of cases result in either no additional sanction or no case to answer.

I recommend looking at the data first before deciding upon your conclusions.

I wasn't trying to be scientific about it, I just personally find it strange, that so few of the cards we have received have resulted in any sort of suspension. I would have expected a team that looks as statistically undisciplined as we are, to have a far higher rate of suspensions than we have.

I watch most televised/streamed games each week, and you know which teams will get the 50/50 calls by the ref before kick off. I'd implore you to watch any of the televised Catalans home matches, or any of the Huddersfield or Wakefield games and see whether you think I am right. Your view may differ to mine.

I don't think it is a conspiracy as such, more a subconscious leaning by the officials, but it seems to happen far too frequently to be a coincidence in my humble opinion.

I note, even a few Dewsbury fans thought you got the better end of the ref on Good Friday for instance.

[Blind side johnny]

2 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

I wasn't trying to be scientific about it, I just personally find it strange, that so few of the cards we have received have resulted in any sort of suspension. I would have expected a team that looks as statistically undisciplined as we are, to have a far higher rate of suspensions than we have.

I watch most televised/streamed games each week, and you know which teams will get the 50/50 calls by the ref before kick off. I'd implore you to watch any of the televised Catalans home matches, or any of the Huddersfield or Wakefield games and see whether you think I am right. Your view may differ to mine.

I don't think it is a conspiracy as such, more a subconscious leaning by the officials, but it seems to happen far too frequently to be a coincidence in my humble opinion.

I note, even a few Dewsbury fans thought you got the better end of the ref on Good Friday for instance.

I'm a poor old pensioner DF so can't afford Sky, hence miss all of these games to which you refer. In all sports the fans claim that there are unintentional biases in favour of certain teams but nobody would suggest such biases against other teams, except for every RL supporter, who believes that their own side is picked upon.

None of the well-balanced, objectively opinioned Dewsbury fans that I know thought that we got the better end of the referee on Good Friday either; it is a well known fact that the RFL instructs referees to lean against Dewsbury, as I have been told on many occasions.

Back to the original point, some teams are a lot smarter than others, knowing just how far they can push it before getting penalised. Other teams, including my own, seem to be incredibly dim on this aspect of the game and suffer accordingly.

[DOGFATHER]

13 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

I'm a poor old pensioner DF so can't afford Sky, hence miss all of these games to which you refer. In all sports the fans claim that there are unintentional biases in favour of certain teams but nobody would suggest such biases against other teams, except for every RL supporter, who believes that their own side is picked upon.

None of the well-balanced, objectively opinioned Dewsbury fans that I know thought that we got the better end of the referee on Good Friday either; it is a well known fact that the RFL instructs referees to lean against Dewsbury, as I have been told on many occasions.

Back to the original point, some teams are a lot smarter than others, knowing just how far they can push it before getting penalised. Other teams, including my own, seem to be incredibly dim on this aspect of the game and suffer accordingly.

Crown flatter, old 9 ole and Nick D, 3 regular poster's on the Dewsbury forum, remarked Dewsbury had been favoured by the ref, (all of them closet Batley fans I guess?  ). However, It is usually a pretty good indicator that things have been bad, when even the losing team's supporters think the ref favoured them. 

It is also worth mentioning, that even the commentators on the Our League coverage of the Toulouse game, identified we were on the wrong end of quite a few very poor decisions by the officials. 

I agree neither we, nor Dewsbury are the smartest in terms of playing the refs, but I admire that about both teams. 

I watched an interview with Ford and Greenwood on Rugby AM a couple of weeks ago, where Ford had told a young hooker he had brought in on loan from HKR last season that if he caught him trying to "win penalties" like he had in the previous game, he would drop him from the side, because it is ruining the game. I completely agree and admire him for it.

I used to look down on football due to the play acting that went off by players, and used to thank my lucky stars that we didn't have that sort of thing in RL. Players only went down injured, if they couldn't physically get up, the  "don't show 'em your hurt lad" attitude.

Now, the game has almost got as bad as football, with players diving on the floor like they have been poleaxed, players constantly appealing for penalties, teams surrounding and questioning the ref's calls after every decision. I fail to see how the game has improved by these changes.

[Blind side johnny]

8 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

Crown flatter, old 9 ole and Nick D, 3 regular poster's on the Dewsbury forum, remarked Dewsbury had been favoured by the ref, (all of them closet Batley fans I guess?  ). However, It is usually a pretty good indicator that things have been bad, when even the losing team's supporters think the ref favoured them. 

It is also worth mentioning, that even the commentators on the Our League coverage of the Toulouse game, identified we were on the wrong end of quite a few very poor decisions by the officials. 

I agree neither we, nor Dewsbury are the smartest in terms of playing the refs, but I admire that about both teams. 

I watched an interview with Ford and Greenwood on Rugby AM a couple of weeks ago, where Ford had told a young hooker he had brought in on loan from HKR last season that if he caught him trying to "win penalties" like he had in the previous game, he would drop him from the side, because it is ruining the game. I completely agree and admire him for it.

I used to look down on football due to the play acting that went off by players, and used to thank my lucky stars that we didn't have that sort of thing in RL. Players only went down injured, if they couldn't physically get up, the  "don't show 'em your hurt lad" attitude.

Now, the game has almost got as bad as football, with players diving on the floor like they have been poleaxed, players constantly appealing for penalties, teams surrounding and questioning the ref's calls after every decision. I fail to see how the game has improved by these changes.

I broadly agree with your sentiments on play-acting DF, but your comments are another example of painting your side as victims. Smart teams aren't just the ones that get away with stuff, they also know when to stop before being penalised. What SJS was complaining about, as I do about my team, is giving away daft penalties; not naive, just daft.

Sport reflecst society by the way, not the other way around, hence the victim culture.

[DOGFATHER]

I 100% agree with both you and SJS about the daft penalties, especially late in the tackle count. There are lots during games that you think the coach must have his head in is hands, given the stupidity and blatancy of them.

I couldn't quite believe the antics of some of the Dewsbury players in the Toronto game. The game was all but won, then the penalties started which got them back in to the game. I did note though, that the sin-binning late on whilst Dewsbury were attacking, for spitting, was a no case to answer.

I fail to see how a touch judge can see an incident so clearly, that he can insist a player be given 10 minutes in the bin, but then the player has a no case to answer when it is put before the disciplinary panel. Surely, something as despicable as spitting at an opponent would warrant a suspension? Even without video evidence, if the TJ has seen the incident, that would be more than sufficient to ban a player?

I think sport has a bit more of an influence on society than you give it credit for though. I am a firm believer, that sport helps to improve standards of morality. It teaches discipline, respect, teamwork and that hard work and determination can produce amazing results, not just in sport, but in life in general.

Maybe, if participation levels in sport were improved and the rules and guidelines were adhered to like they used to be, society would be a better place?

[Blind side johnny]

Yes, I should have said that about watching sport as distinct from playing, which as you rightly say does improve personal discipline.

Annakin was sent off by the way, not sin-binned, although it made no material difference as there was less than 10 minutes remaining. Some TJ's and referees get a bit more excited than the players by the prospect of being seen on TV.

I believe that teams give away panalties late in the game such as ours against Toronto largely .due to fatigue.

 

Let's hope that your lot have learned a lesson before playing Leigh, although they are nothing like as bad as in previous years.

[bulldogs17]

Rettie has been given a 1 match ban. 

Down referred to tribunal on a Grade D charge for leading with elbow/forearm - Doesn't sound good. 

[redditchbulldog]

Rets has got  1 match ban and Jack Downs has had his case referred to tribunal and been classed as grade D offence so looks like he will possibly get a 3 or 4 match ban.

[RogerT]

So Reittie's ban will be this week then, and when is the tribunal held.

[graham fisher]

If Swinton fans get their way Downs will never play rugby ever again.

[phildog]

There is another facet of 'incorrect i.e not guilty or no case to answer decisions. That is the loss of players for some off or all of a game, giving the opposition an advantage and possibly a win when on-field decisions are quashed. 2 things then; either refs are getting it horrendously wrong or the RFL board is making refs look stupid.

[ernieone]

These are fans that support a team with Jamie Acton in there ranks

[Blind side johnny]

12 hours ago, ernieone said:

These are fans that support a team with Jamie Acton in there ranks

Not much though, he's out for the season I believe.

Two wrongs don't make a right though, do they Ernie?

[Bill H]

16 hours ago, graham fisher said:

If Swinton fans get their way Downs will never play rugby ever again.

Which Swinton fans?  Where have you read or heard this Graham?