Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Scubby

Wakey v Cas Womens' Challenge Cup Semi - Wow!

Recommended Posts

That is harsh! Good luck to Cas in the final, they are a very strong side.

Capture6.JPG.27d3d0724c72fc3cf7659e40dbc92915.JPG

Edited by Scubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Scubby said:

That is harsh! Good luck to Cas in the final, they are a very strong side.

Capture6.JPG.27d3d0724c72fc3cf7659e40dbc92915.JPG

That picture just be of one of the only times a Wakefield player held the ball!

Ouch.


Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

That picture just be of one of the only times a Wakefield player held the ball!

Ouch.

I think Wakefield have just been promoted which may mean Castleford have swept up the best players in the locality in the first instance. Still a shame in such an important game. I think Cas v Leeds might be the final which was an excellent game at Warrington last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MADREDNIGE said:

That score will really help the game! 

Do you think they should have eased up? Nonsense. They are a very good team and getting better. I’d  prefer to see them play theTrinity men next time out, instead of that woeful garbage we produced Friday night.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can recall some pretty one-sided men's Semis going back which the game managed to survive. Leeds copped seventy to Wigan, for example.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Number 16 said:

I can recall some pretty one-sided men's Semis going back which the game managed to survive. Leeds copped seventy to Wigan, for example.

The Wigan v London CCSF from a few years ago was pretty harsh too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some encouraging crowds this weekend. 1,000 + at Hull FC, 913 at Wakefield and 738 at St Helens.

Considering the women's (football) Super League average is around 800, that's really positive!

Edited by Chris22
  • Like 4

The Tryline Blog - http://thetryline.blogspot.com/ - Twitter - @TrylineBlog
Latest blog - "Play-Off Wrap #1 - Cas cause a shock, Wigan march on"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

St Helens 10:16 Leeds in the other semi-final, which you can catch up on, via Twitch.

  • Like 1

Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. (Susan Ertz)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Article on BBC Sport website ....

Castleford played an illegal player in their semi-final against wakefield.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/48944001

Without any personal comment on the decision by the RFL, I just post this report of a similar occurrence during the 2015 Challenge Cup competition ...

"Following the conclusion of the first round ties; two clubs, Rochdale Mayfield and Hull Dockers, were reported to the Rugby Football League's Operational Rules Tribunal for each fielding an ineligible player. The Tribunal found both clubs guilty of the offence and disqualified them from the competition. The teams they defeated in the first round, Great Britain Police and Leigh Miners Rangers, were reinstated into the cup and played in the second round."

Edited by RL does what Sky says

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the face of it, if a club has played an illegible player then surely the match should be awarded to the opposition. The 100 point hammering is irrelevant in my opinion, even though that was probably taken into account.

I accept that an administrative error may have occurred, but it sets a precedent and ignorance of the rules is no defence.

On a more positive note it's great to see the womens game flourishing, as well as the other sectors of our game...hope it goes from strength to strength and looking forward to seeing the Final.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Treize Hombres said:

On the face of it, if a club has played an illegible player then surely the match should be awarded to the opposition. The 100 point hammering is irrelevant in my opinion, even though that was probably taken into account.

I accept that an administrative error may have occurred, but it sets a precedent and ignorance of the rules is no defence.

On a more positive note it's great to see the womens game flourishing, as well as the other sectors of our game...hope it goes from strength to strength and looking forward to seeing the Final.

 

There have been issues before where the RFL assumed its tournament rules covered fairly obvious things but then discovered they weren't clear.

For example, in 2008 Hull FC played the same ineligible player twice in the Cup but were not expelled from the tournament http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/super_league/hull/7494285.stm.

That could be what's happened here.

  • Thanks 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

There have been issues before where the RFL assumed its tournament rules covered fairly obvious things but then discovered they weren't clear.

For example, in 2008 Hull FC played the same ineligible player twice in the Cup but were not expelled from the tournament http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/super_league/hull/7494285.stm.

That could be what's happened here.

Possibly so.

Once again this highlights a lack of communication from the Governing Body to the participating clubs.

I've no doubt it was a genuine mistake, but it reflects bad on our game when this stuff gets into the media. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Article on BBC Sport website ....

Castleford played an illegal player in their semi-final against wakefield.

With that score line was it Jonathan Thurston?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't this topic be in the cheating section of the Womens Forum?


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

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Treize Hombres said:

On the face of it, if a club has played an illegible player then surely the match should be awarded to the opposition. The 100 point hammering is irrelevant in my opinion, even though that was probably taken into account.

I have a feeling that if the game had been settled by a drop goal, scored by the ineligible player, then the RFL might have come to a different conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Leeds Wire said:

I have a feeling that if the game had been settled by a drop goal, scored by the ineligible player, then the RFL might have come to a different conclusion.

Agreed..I think that would be a likely outcome.

And thanks for using the correct word ineligible...have just realised my grammatical error....perhaps the competition rules sent out were indeed illegible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting case. Without wanting to encourage inconsistency or rule bending, it's in nobody's best interests to have a side that has just lost 100-0 competing in a final which is likely to have the biggest audience ever for a women's game in this country.

The crowds at women's games are very encouraging, often bettering the football equivalent and it feels like a real area of growth for the sport. It would be a shame for this showcase opportunity to be undermined because we have put a team in the final by default who have demonstrated they are nowhere near worthy of being on that stage and presumably are likely to be on the end of another tonking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Colin James said:

Interesting case. Without wanting to encourage inconsistency or rule bending, it's in nobody's best interests to have a side that has just lost 100-0 competing in a final which is likely to have the biggest audience ever for a women's game in this country.

The crowds at women's games are very encouraging, often bettering the football equivalent and it feels like a real area of growth for the sport. It would be a shame for this showcase opportunity to be undermined because we have put a team in the final by default who have demonstrated they are nowhere near worthy of being on that stage and presumably are likely to be on the end of another tonking.

Fair point, but it is inconsistent.  

Sweep it under the carpet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/07/2019 at 16:08, Wellsy4HullFC said:

That picture just be of one of the only times a Wakefield player held the ball!

Ouch.

I think she was just running it back to the halfway line so that they could kick off again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Leeds Wire said:

Fair point, but it is inconsistent.  

Sweep it under the carpet?

I think in this case, yes, that is the best course of action.

Punish them in some other way perhaps, but Wakefield playing in the final really wouldn't do anything for the women's game. There will be a lot of people there who have never seen a women's game in the flesh before (I'll be one of them). They need a good competitive game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, MZH said:

I think in this case, yes, that is the best course of action.

Punish them in some other way perhaps, but Wakefield playing in the final really wouldn't do anything for the women's game. There will be a lot of people there who have never seen a women's game in the flesh before (I'll be one of them). They need a good competitive game.

Exactly this. Bigger picture for the sport says Cas stay in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/07/2019 at 15:59, MADREDNIGE said:

That score will really help the game! 

YAWN, big scores have been going on for 150 years in RL and sport in general since year dot (Aboath 36 Bon Accord 0), just go away if you're not bothered about supporting the sport or continually being negative because a team thrashed another team!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Colin James said:

Exactly this. Bigger picture for the sport says Cas stay in.

For the sport itself maybe, but might it set a precedent ?  Could Mayfield and Hull Dockers have cause for complaint for being kicked out of the 2015 Challenge Cup for exactly the same offence ?

If the main reason for "sweeping it under the carpet" was to help the women's game prosper, might those two teams have a case for sex discrimination ?

And would a Super League club have a reason to be let off if they did the same in the Challenge Cup ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...