Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Eddie

Grabbing Balls

Recommended Posts

Lower decker knacker checker.  (LDKC).  

What say a player suffers a rupture or worse still, fertility issues?  Sometimes you do get a handful in the tackle but to then to continue grabbing and pulling is another matter.

i haven’t seen Linehams but imo Makinsons was as bad as it gets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what i'd like to know is why would a player have his balls dangling like that at all, it's just asking for trouble.

  • Haha 2

Through the fish-eyed lens of tear stained eyes
I can barely define the shape of this moment in time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Cheshire Setter said:

So he was trying to bring him to climax then presumably? Rubbish technique.

You never know until you’ve tried it (not that I’m volunteering). 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

8 game ban for Lineham. Nice holiday for the lad.

He pleaded not guilty so expect an appeal 

Share this post


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

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.

 

And they get an easy ride and are rarely, if ever, challenged. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All three incidents have only been picked up by a player complaint. I wonder if this goes on far more than we thought but in previous years, players just wouldn't report it?

Abdull has got 2 matches, Makinson got 5 and Lineham 8. That is a significant discrepancy. I'll give the reasoning for the decisions a read tomorrow to see if there is an obvious answer why!


Twitter: @TrylineUK
Latest Blog: A Sport on the Brink - LINK: https://thetryline.blogspot.com/2020/09/a-sport-on-brink.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LeeF said:

And they get an easy ride and are rarely, if ever, challenged. 

Exactly, I have long maintained that if coaches got punished for the behaviour of their players they would soon change how the players behaved.

  • Like 1

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Chris22 said:

All three incidents have only been picked up by a player complaint. I wonder if this goes on far more than we thought but in previous years, players just wouldn't report it?

Abdull has got 2 matches, Makinson got 5 and Lineham 8. That is a significant discrepancy. I'll give the reasoning for the decisions a read tomorrow to see if there is an obvious answer why!

I can't speak for the other two but Makinson had his charge reduced from an F, hence the lower ban, and that was in recognition of his outstanding disciplinary record to date.  He also admitted guilt and apologised (though whether that made a difference I don't know!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, my missus said:

what i'd like to know is why would a player have his balls dangling like that at all, it's just asking for trouble.

Something the woman's game has dealt with effectively from day 1. They are still vulnerable to a Trumping, though.


"Men will be proud to say 'I am a European'. We hope to see a day when men of every country will think as much of being a European as of being from their native land." (Winston Churchill)

Share this post


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

Lower decker knacker checker.  (LDKC).  

What say a player suffers a rupture or worse still, fertility issues?  Sometimes you do get a handful in the tackle but to then to continue grabbing and pulling is another matter.

i haven’t seen Linehams but imo Makinsons was as bad as it gets.

Im still baffled about how he didn't get the full 8 games..I dont care that he was an angel beforehand..it was totally out of order and warranted the full 8 games.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bobbruce said:

I’m fairly sure the RFL will have this in hand. They do need to get a firm grip of the situation. 

They’ve handled it ok so far. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, why do we call it a squirrel grip? I have many squirrels who transit my garden. I’ve never had one grab my testicles, although they do steal the bird feed. Is it a common problem or are they being unfairly targeted with sexual assault allegations? The subject wasn’t really approached on episodes of Rocky and Bullwinkle.

Share this post


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

Also, why do we call it a squirrel grip? I have many squirrels who transit my garden. I’ve never had one grab my testicles, although they do steal the bird feed. Is it a common problem or are they being unfairly targeted with sexual assault allegations? The subject wasn’t really approached on episodes of Rocky and Bullwinkle.

Put more peanut butter on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Cheshire Setter said:

Also, why do we call it a squirrel grip? I have many squirrels who transit my garden. I’ve never had one grab my testicles, although they do steal the bird feed. Is it a common problem or are they being unfairly targeted with sexual assault allegations? The subject wasn’t really approached on episodes of Rocky and Bullwinkle.

Isn't it obvious why the reference to squirrels?

Anyway, I think this behaviour needs to be completely eradicated.

I don't think its funny fellas and its a huge (disgusting) negative in terms of the games image on television.

20 to 30 years of hard fought development work in the community wiped out in an instant.

I'm not saying that these blokes are sexually motivated but it looks abhorrent.

Three more examples, that the game is its own worst enemy. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Cheshire Setter said:

Also, why do we call it a squirrel grip? I have many squirrels who transit my garden. I’ve never had one grab my testicles  

Holding nuts, I assume. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Chris22 said:

All three incidents have only been picked up by a player complaint. I wonder if this goes on far more than we thought but in previous years, players just wouldn't report it?

Abdull has got 2 matches, Makinson got 5 and Lineham 8. That is a significant discrepancy. I'll give the reasoning for the decisions a read tomorrow to see if there is an obvious answer why!

Before being able to read the reasonings I can actually see why Abdull’s grading was lower and hence his ban as the offence looked different to the other two. It looked more accidental and stopped once he realised

As others have already posted the reasons for downgrading of Makinson’s charge have never been clearly stated although I can understand why his ban was less than Lineham who has more of a disciplinary record

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Padge said:

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.

 

I wouldn't have any other coach other than Mr Wane to lead our national team he will get inbetween the ears of his charges and we will in my opinion see a more focussed attitude from them for the job in hand than the teams Wane Bennett sent out.

But I will not be convinced any other way, that Mr Wane's words were still ringing in the ears of Ben Flowers in that incident with Lance Hohia so early in the game, we know from interviews how passionate Mr Wane can be and a GF v his greatest enemy at domestic level would be the pinnicle, now he will be transferring that against British RL's greatest enemy, can't wait, but hopefully the fuse length of the player's will be a little longer than Ben Flowers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cheshire Setter said:

Also, why do we call it a squirrel grip? I have many squirrels who transit my garden. I’ve never had one grab my testicles, although they do steal the bird feed. Is it a common problem or are they being unfairly targeted with sexual assault allegations? The subject wasn’t really approached on episodes of Rocky and Bullwinkle.

I think the Australians called it a squirrel grip first, so we have simply imported it. Squirrels in Australia have been eliminated as an invasive species, perhaps that (along with the more obvious nut reference) is why they use the term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Chris22 said:

Abdull has got 2 matches, Makinson got 5 and Lineham 8. That is a significant discrepancy. I'll give the reasoning for the decisions a read tomorrow to see if there is an obvious answer why!

Don't know about Abdull's past disciplinary record but Lineham's is poor, he seems to be picking up bans every year for various indiscretions.


Lets Get Brexit Done !!!!!

Share this post


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

Before being able to read the reasonings I can actually see why Abdull’s grading was lower and hence his ban as the offence looked different to the other two. It looked more accidental and stopped once he realised

As others have already posted the reasons for downgrading of Makinson’s charge have never been clearly stated although I can understand why his ban was less than Lineham who has more of a disciplinary record

Yes.  If the charge is whatever it is then by all means give a lower end of the spectrum available, but to change the charge to a different offence JUST because of supposed previous behaviour, then at is a bit dumb.

8 matches for Lineham takes him to almost if not all of the end of our truncated season.

Edited by Rupert Prince

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Yes.  If the charge is whatever it is then by all means give a lower end of the spectrum available, but to change the charge to a different offence JUST because of supposed previous behaviour, then at is a bit dumb.

8 matches for Lineham takes him to almost if not all of the end of our truncated season.

yup, injuries and form permitted,  he may have played his last game for this season, no guarentee he gets his spot back if we're still playing when his ban is up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Saintslass said:

I can't speak for the other two but Makinson had his charge reduced from an F, hence the lower ban, and that was in recognition of his outstanding disciplinary record to date.  He also admitted guilt and apologised (though whether that made a difference I don't know!).

No, it wasn't. The actual challenge was downgraded from F to E, nothing to do with his record. It is there in writing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be 100% clear, the grade F and E for Lineham and Makinson were nothing to do with past record. Those gradings are for the actual offence. 

It is there in writing. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...