Eddie Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 With Lineham and Abdull both facing lengthy bans for grabbing an opponent’s and Makinson currently serving one, I have to question why they do it. Even as a heat of the moment thing I can’t believe they don’t know what they’re doing, and must know they’ll face a long ban as a result? One a season in the whole league might be just understandable, but three within a few weeks is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whippet13 Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 12 minutes ago, Eddie said: With Lineham and Abdull both facing lengthy bans for grabbing an opponent’s and Makinson currently serving one, I have to question why they do it. Even as a heat of the moment thing I can’t believe they don’t know what they’re doing, and must know they’ll face a long ban as a result? One a season in the whole league might be just understandable, but three within a few weeks is ridiculous. I can understand they want the attacker to drop the ball (pardon the pun), but it's just plain weird and rather embarrassing behaviour. Surprisingly, it appears 5 matches clearly isn't a deterrent, double it to 10 and it'll stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 It is rather odd that Makinson ended up with an E-grade charge, Lineham has an F, and Abdul has a D-grade. But it is even more odd that players are doing this. Particularly in the weeks following the high-profile Makinson case. I think Warrington should be disciplining Lineham anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellsy4HullFC Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Makes you wonder if they're doing it so that can get time off during the pandemic. Never seen so many people commit such an obvious banning action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hela Wigmen Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, Dave T said: It is rather odd that Makinson ended up with an E-grade charge, Lineham has an F, and Abdul has a D-grade. But it is even more odd that players are doing this. Particularly in the weeks following the high-profile Makinson case. I think Warrington should be disciplining Lineham anyway. Wasn’t Makinson’s downgraded due to his previous record? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 1 minute ago, Hela Wigmen said: Wasn’t Makinson’s downgraded due to his previous record? No, they just appealed it and the panel agreed that this was an E instead of an F as he didn't intend to hurt him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted September 15, 2020 Author Share Posted September 15, 2020 3 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said: Makes you wonder if they're doing it so that can get time off during the pandemic. Never seen so many people commit such an obvious banning action. Indeed. Their clubs must be absolutely livid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbar Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 13 minutes ago, Dave T said: It is rather odd that Makinson ended up with an E-grade charge, Lineham has an F, and Abdul has a D-grade. But it is even more odd that players are doing this. Particularly in the weeks following the high-profile Makinson case. I think Warrington should be disciplining Lineham anyway. I'm sure that the disciplinary panel can come up with a formula to determine punishment based on the combinations of meat and veg involved. "The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby. "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 The iconic ball grab in British sporting history.  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yipyee Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 23 minutes ago, Dave T said: It is rather odd that Makinson ended up with an E-grade charge, Lineham has an F, and Abdul has a D-grade. But it is even more odd that players are doing this. Particularly in the weeks following the high-profile Makinson case. I think Warrington should be disciplining Lineham anyway. The only thing i can think of is the different angle of attack, prolonged period ie grabbed by mistake? And abdul was doing it as part of a tackle where oddly makinson had already been tackled and was lay on the floor, there was no excuse of hand in wrong place of a tackle etc.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidM Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Can we please have these disciplinary hearings televised with in depth legal argument . Be a right laugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapologetic pedant Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Who was that England RU bloke who engaged in some low-jinks against a Welsh player? The look on his face suggested he saw it as joshing. Maybe our players have started seeing these manoeuvres in carry-on terms as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Stottle Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 36 minutes ago, DavidM said: Can we please have these disciplinary hearings televised with in depth legal argument . Be a right laugh How we about we sensationalise it and name it the Hopoate Files  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarrogateKnights Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Personally just like spitting, eye gouging and biting I think any "low grab" should be disciplined in a harsh way. 5 games is no where close to the mark for me personally. 5 months might be getting closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoubleD Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 2 hours ago, Dave T said: It is rather odd that Makinson ended up with an E-grade charge, Lineham has an F, and Abdul has a D-grade. Sounds like the disciplinary committee made a right balls up of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidM Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 The ballsy decision would be to give all of them long bans as a deterrent . The ball’s in the court of the disciplinary to sort it . Must take their eye of the ball with this one . Stiff punishments on the tackle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedfordshire Bronco Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 4 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said: Makes you wonder if they're doing it so that can get time off during the pandemic. Never seen so many people commit such an obvious banning action. Or maybe its hard to get a Tinder date in lockdown and they are expanding their options? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedfordshire Bronco Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 1 hour ago, DavidM said: The ballsy decision would be to give all of them long bans as a deterrent . The ball’s in the court of the disciplinary to sort it . Must take their eye of the ball with this one . Stiff punishments on the tackle Seminal comedy comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 I unironically thought upon reading the headline "that's a dick move" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedfordshire Bronco Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 2 hours ago, DoubleD said: Sounds like the disciplinary committee made a right balls up of it I think it was Abdul who cocked up personally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedfordshire Bronco Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 3 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said: Who was that England RU bloke who engaged in some low-jinks against a Welsh player? The look on his face suggested he saw it as joshing. Maybe our players have started seeing these manoeuvres in carry-on terms as well. Marler.... In fairness he is funny and it was as you say a low-jinks move on a Lions teammate Compared to some things that happen at the breakdown, maul, scrum and even line out it was relatively tame! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 4 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said: Who was that England RU bloke who engaged in some low-jinks against a Welsh player? The look on his face suggested he saw it as joshing. Maybe our players have started seeing these manoeuvres in carry-on terms as well. No, he was trying to get the blind touchjudge to see the offence and get Marler sent off. As opposed to slotting him and getting sent off himself. "We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Padge Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 When we tried dishing out 10, 11, 12 match bans for foul play (late 80s I think) it had no effect on behaviour. SO they gave up on the long bans. Coaches are the key to player behaviour. Â Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007 Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king" Â This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Man of Kent Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 8 game ban for Lineham. Nice holiday for the lad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheshire Setter Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 7 hours ago, Dave T said: No, they just appealed it and the panel agreed that this was an E instead of an F as he didn't intend to hurt him. So he was trying to bring him to climax then presumably? Rubbish technique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.