This week's disciplinary.

[Dave T]

I can't wait to be honest. 

Leeds' battle with the disciplinary has been an interesting story bubbling away throughout the season,  and it's all taken an interesting turn. 

We've seen (imo)  why cracking down on foul play is important,  as Leeds have their number 7 missing for the biggest game of the year due to an off the ball shoulder to the face. 

Leeds will have Martin back following his ban. 

But then Saints will be sweating on Knowles,  and maybe to a lesser extent Welsby.  What will the disciplinary do,  stay hard-line,  or soften their stance for Grand Final week? 

My view is Knowles should be banned,  Welsby's reviewed. 

I fear for Matthew Shawn's blood pressure though this week! 

[FearTheVee]

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I can't wait to be honest. 

Leeds' battle with the disciplinary has been an interesting story bubbling away throughout the season,  and it's all taken an interesting turn. 

We've seen (imo)  why cracking down on foul play is important,  as Leeds have their number 7 missing for the biggest game of the year due to an off the ball shoulder to the face. 

Leeds will have Martin back following his ban. 

But then Saints will be sweating on Knowles,  and maybe to a lesser extent Welsby.  What will the disciplinary do,  stay hard-line,  or soften their stance for Grand Final week? 

My view is Knowles should be banned,  Welsby's reviewed. 

I fear for Matthew Shawn's blood pressure though this week! 

I think it’s a shame that we’ve arrived at a place where a lot of fans are actively wanting one of our biggest young stars to be banned from the showpiece final for the heinous sin of smashing someone in possession of the ball.

That used to be what RL was about. Now it’s about fans whining for bans left right and centre for zip all, desperately trying (and failing) to freeze frame tackles in the hope of finding something that could maybe be perceived as an issue.

It’s lame. (I don’t mean you Dave T, but the fact there is so much focus on the disciplinary every week is so frustrating).

Edited September 19, 2022 by FearTheVee

[north yorks trinity]

1 minute ago, FearTheVee said:

I think it’s a shame that we’ve arrived at a place where a lot of fans are actively wanting one of our biggest young stars to be banned from the showpiece final for the heinous sin of smashing someone in possession of the ball.

That used to be what RL was about. Now it’s about fans whining for bans left right and centre for zip all, desperately trying (and failing) to freeze frame tackles in the hope of finding something that could maybe be perceived as an issue.

It’s lame.

Are you worried or something? I don't think the the general mood is to "actively wanting someone banned". I think it's more that we hope we can trust the disciplinary to take a balanced and consistent view based on player safety, player responsibility and the facts of what actually happened, rather than on the implications for the player, the club or the games they may miss.

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, FearTheVee said:

I think it’s a shame that we’ve arrived at a place where a lot of fans are actively wanting one of our biggest young stars to be banned from the showpiece final for the heinous sin of smashing someone in possession of the ball.

That used to be what RL was about. Now it’s about fans whining for bans left right and centre for zip all, desperately trying (and failing) to freeze frame tackles in the hope of finding something that could maybe be perceived as an issue.

It’s lame. (I don’t mean you Dave T, but the fact there is so much focus on the disciplinary every week is so frustrating).

I'm not sure that's entirely fair on Welsby.  There is a view that his shoulder hit the Salford player in the head,  and the Salford player ended up with a bloody nose. Those calling for a ban feel he deserves a ban due to foul play. 

The reason I'm finding this interesting is that Rhys Martin's tackle was relatively innocuous and carried a ban,  I think Welsby is at risk of a ban too,  although as per the match thread,  there is a bit of blur on the coverage. 

The Knowles one imho is a shocker and should carry a few matches imho. 

[Dave T]

8 minutes ago, FearTheVee said:

 

It’s lame. (I don’t mean you Dave T, but the fact there is so much focus on the disciplinary every week is so frustrating).

I agree on this point -  but it's where we are now. There has been a running battle with them all year,  and tbh,  maybe if the clubs,  players,  fans and media had embraced the crackdown and the RFL had the balls to stick with it,  maybe we wouldn't be worrying about whether three England players were facing bans going into the World Cup. 

[Dave T]

 

 

[Dave T]

 

[LeeF]

I’m looking forward to the inevitable Leeds appeal if a Saints player doesn’t get a long enough ban

[Live after death]

28 minutes ago, FearTheVee said:

I think it’s a shame that we’ve arrived at a place where a lot of fans are actively wanting one of our biggest young stars to be banned from the showpiece final for the heinous sin of smashing someone in possession of the ball.

That used to be what RL was about. Now it’s about fans whining for bans left right and centre for zip all, desperately trying (and failing) to freeze frame tackles in the hope of finding something that could maybe be perceived as an issue.

It’s lame. (I don’t mean you Dave T, but the fact there is so much focus on the disciplinary every week is so frustrating).

If we have arrived at that place, its in the RFL’s shoulder they have allowed the MRP to give out “ frivolous” bans, Leeds more than most have been hammered by the MRP, the last  2 Martin bans being case point, so by the precedent set so all season long,  Knowles (illegal  pressure on joint) and Welbsley (direct contact with the head resulting in blood from nose/face from foul play) should not be playing Saturday, anything less would be an utter disgrace, and would rubber stamp that the MRP is not fit, and wouldn’t be surprised if legal action was considered soon by a club/player if keeps up. 

 

[LeeF]

30 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I'm not sure that's entirely fair on Welsby.  There is a view that his shoulder hit the Salford player in the head,  and the Salford player ended up with a bloody nose. Those calling for a ban feel he deserves a ban due to foul play. 

The reason I'm finding this interesting is that Rhys Martin's tackle was relatively innocuous and carried a ban,  I think Welsby is at risk of a ban too,  although as per the match thread,  there is a bit of blur on the coverage. 

The Knowles one imho is a shocker and should carry a few matches imho. 

The contact in the Welsby tackle is unclear. Also I don’t know if he has “previous” for this season which would therefore result in any Grade A charge receiving a ban as with the Martin tackle

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, LeeF said:

The contact in the Welsby tackle is unclear. Also I don’t know if he has “previous” for this season which would therefore result in any Grade A charge receiving a ban as with the Martin tackle

Yeah I'm not 100% sure on the contact.  Whether it would be classified as Grade A,  I don't know,  because if we want to compare to Martin's it is much more reckless and forceful and with a shoulder. Point of contact is the crucial factor here. 

[Cumbrian Fanatic]

For mine Knowles' is worse the Welsby's, it was a deliberate act rather than getting it slightly wrong

[LeeF]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Yeah I'm not 100% sure on the contact.  Whether it would be classified as Grade A,  I don't know,  because if we want to compare to Martin's it is much more reckless and forceful and with a shoulder. Point of contact is the crucial factor here. 

There have been numerous “unclear on point of contact” outcomes this season resulting in no ban which I can easily understand and accept in this instance although they won’t be watching on a small iPad screen

However I can see a complete meltdown and the usual #GamesGone and #CorruptRFL tags being overworked if that happens and Matthew Shaw won’t be the only person to explode 

[johnh1]

Not much credit given to Atkin for just getting up and playing the ball. Many players would have stayed down as he could easily have done with a bust nose and lip. It would then presumably have been looked at by the video ref. He was also the victim of the chicken wing tackle, and had to leave the field for two minutes late on after receiving another head knock. He took some hammer in that game, but stood up well.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, LeeF said:

There have been numerous “unclear on point of contact” outcomes this season resulting in no ban which I can easily understand and accept in this instance although they won’t be watching on a small iPad screen

However I can see a complete meltdown and the usual #GamesGone and #CorruptRFL tags being overworked if that happens and Matthew Shaw won’t be the only person to explode 

Yup, it does look worse on TV,  but it's so fast I couldn't see where it was. Interesting to see whether there is better tech available. 

I did a quick search,  Welsby has had 1 Grade A charge this year -  his only issue,  so I believe he would still be eligible for a Grade A zero ban. 

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, Cumbrian Fanatic said:

For mine Knowles' is worse the Welsby's, it was a deliberate act rather than getting it slightly wrong

I agree.  And unnecessary. 

[DavidM]

30 minutes ago, Dave T said:

 

My thoughts haven’t changed , it was cheap and dangerous 

[Dunbar]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I agree.  And unnecessary. 

As opposed to necessary foul play?

[Dave T]

Just now, Dunbar said:

As opposed to necessary foul play?

Sometimes #### happens, mistimed high tackles happen. 

But this player was halted and controlled.  I understand holding his wrist,  but then the prolonged further movement back was cynical and dangerous and should receive a hefty penalty imo. 

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

As opposed to necessary foul play?

And,  we've covered Makinson elsewhere... 

[Dunbar]

We will see what the panel come up with.

My view is that the Welsby one was a cracking tackle and the Knowles one was a sin bin but nothing more.

[Just Browny]

1 hour ago, FearTheVee said:

I think it’s a shame that we’ve arrived at a place where a lot of fans are actively wanting one of our biggest young stars to be banned from the showpiece final for the heinous sin of smashing someone in possession of the ball.

That used to be what RL was about. Now it’s about fans whining for bans left right and centre for zip all, desperately trying (and failing) to freeze frame tackles in the hope of finding something that could maybe be perceived as an issue.

It’s lame. (I don’t mean you Dave T, but the fact there is so much focus on the disciplinary every week is so frustrating).

I think it's a shame we've arrived at a place where Saints fans don't think the rules should apply to them as it wouldn't be convenient for an upcoming game.

Only kidding. I've watched RL for 30 years and they've always been in that place.

[Pie tries]

Knowles has to be banned. What he did has no place in our sport. Leave Welsby to those who know best - though no intent with his tackle, other than to legit muller him…

[DavidM]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

 

 

Just my view , i think that’s one of the  great tackles . Tremendous shot 

[Harry Stottle]

25 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

We will see what the panel come up with.

My view is that the Welsby one was a cracking tackle and the Knowles one was a sin bin but nothing more.

I have been somewhat a lone voice in saying that the judiciary on head contact  gets it wrong a lot of the time,  there is no doubt whatsoever that Welsby's tackle was aimed at the upper body of Atkin and performed at such a pace that when Atkins adjusted his body in a downward motion in recieving the ball that he put his head into the aimed contact area, there was no way humanly possible that Welsby could divert his tackle.

But we have seen this time and time again this season, when a good legal tackle would have been effected and it is the movement of the ball carrier in either trying to avoid the tackle or slipping in the tackle who is actually the cause of head contact not the tackler, but it is the tackler who has recieved a suspension, so in this respect unfortunately Welsby who I do not think he did anything wrong whatsoever but to keep with continuity the judiciary has no other option but to give him a suspension.