Sun 26th Feb: SL: Castleford Tigers v St Helens KO 13:00

[Davo5]

6 hours ago, yipyee said:

I think it was a yellow and no penalty try as hurrell was in the back ground. He stopped running to cut back inside and if welsby missed hurrell would have stopped him. Deffo a yellow for the high tackle although a few high shots went without a yellow....

Yeah a few Saints players were guilty of head hunting with Percival one of the main  offenders,must have been fatigue as they are not those type of players.

[Old Frightful]

6 hours ago, yipyee said:

I think it was a yellow and no penalty try as hurrell was in the back ground. He stopped running to cut back inside and if welsby missed hurrell would have stopped him. Deffo a yellow for the high tackle although a few high shots went without a yellow....

This is Hurrel you're talking about, it would have been a try, no doubt.

Unless, of course, it was Jordan Turner.

[Harry Stottle]

18 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

I believe its either yellow or penalty try? Which is daft

Confirmed by Chris Kendall with the Tommy Makinson ruling v Salford in the semi last season.

[Harry Stottle]

13 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

He jumps with both feet of the ground and hits him directly on the head. To say no one would mention it in another situation is laughable.

Have you ever been in the situation were you are running to effect a tackle and the intended target takes evasive action and changes direction at close to 90°, you also in that situation have to change direction and in doing so your feet will unintentionally leave the floor it happens.

I expect that Welsby will recieve something from the disciplinary it may only be a caution or it could even be a ban, but I do not think for one moment that it will be viewed as you seem to do Chris as a maliciously directed effort to injure his opponent.

[Chrispmartha]

7 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Have you ever been in the situation were you are running to effect a tackle and the intended target takes evasive action and changes direction at close to 90°, you also in that situation have to change direction and in doing so your feet will unintentionally leave the floor it happens.

I expect that Welsby will recieve something from the disciplinary it may only be a caution or it could even be a ban, but I do not think for one moment that it will be viewed as you seem to do Chris as a maliciously directed effort to injure his opponent.

I didn't say it was a malicious direct effort to injure his opponent, you've made that up.

He got the tackle all wrong and we've seen bans/cards handed out for less.

If its not a card or a ban fine - let's hope that it's consistent going forward.

[Chrispmartha]

32 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Confirmed by Chris Kendall with the Tommy Makinson ruling v Salford in the semi last season.

Isn't that if its deemed a 'professional foul' though?

 

[FearTheVee]

Surprised people are shouting for a ban.

I acknowledge I'm inherently biased but it looked to me like first contact with the shoulder moving up to being grabby around the neck.

I've read some comments like "direct contact to the head" which I can't fathom watching it back.  Looks like a genuine tackle attempt which he got a bit wrong.  It ends up high and a penalty try - seems about right to me.

[Saint Toppy]

Regarding the penalty try can't really have any complaints had the Ref gone for a yellow and not a penalty try. First contact was on the top of the shoulder but it ended up around the head so there was always some sort of 'penalty' due to Cas. The Ref went with the penalty try which was fair enough.

As for the rest of the game Cas should definately see this a 2 points lost, they won't get many better chances to beat Saints at home than they had yesterday. Saints looked lethargic & well off the pace, particularly at the start, and had Cas been more clinical they could well have built up a lead that Saints would have found hard to claw back.

Ultimately Saints found a way to win, which is what good teams do. I think most Saints fans, myself included, thought this would be a loss for them, so picking up a win is a bit of a bonus. TBH i'm not that concerned  about the relatively poor performance given the circumstances. They'll get a good few days rest now and probably have 4-5 players back for the Leeds game next Friday. Looking forward to seeing the Whino's be 0 from 3 by next weekend 

[Harry Stottle]

6 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Isn't that if its deemed a 'professional foul' though?

 

Read back and find Padges interpretation, it is how the rule is deliberated upon it's one or the other penalty try or Card, except in the action of deliberate foul play whereby a sending off could also be effected.

[Harry Stottle]

6 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

Regarding the penalty try can't really have any complaints had the Ref gone for a yellow and not a penalty try. First contact was on the top of the shoulder but it ended up around the head so there was always some sort of 'penalty' due to Cas. The Ref went with the penalty try which was fair enough.

As for the rest of the game Cas should definately see this a 2 points lost, they won't get many better chances to beat Saints at home than they had yesterday. Saints looked lethargic & well off the pace, particularly at the start, and had Cas been more clinical they could well have built up a lead that Saints would have found hard to claw back.

Ultimately Saints found a way to win, which is what good teams do. I think most Saints fans, myself included, thought this would be a loss for them, so picking up a win is a bit of a bonus. TBH i'm not that concerned  about the relatively poor performance given the circumstances. They'll get a good few days rest now and probably have 4-5 players back for the Leeds game next Friday. Looking forward to seeing the Whino's be 0 from 3 by next weekend 

In the post match interview Paul Wellens said they will be in training this week for Friday's game v Leeds, then they have 3 days off the following week prior to visiting Leigh.

[Kenilworth Tiger]

Well just got home after staying up North last night.

 

Some of the comments here are laughable - our composure with the final pass was really the only thing letting us down yesterday and not many people are going to create so many scoring chances against. Saints. Saints deserved winners and players like Welsby and Walmsley are a pleasure to watch - I think we'll be fine this year.

Faraimo should be dropped for next week, no question.

 

Somebody on twitter did raise a very good point about our overseas contingent....Faraimo, Fonua, Vete, Matagi, Mamo - all absolutely awful (except potentially Mamo 50% of the time!!)

 

As for the Welsby incident, would have preferred a pen and red card rather than penalty try to be honest.

 

 

[Saint Toppy]

1 hour ago, Kenilworth Tiger said:

As for the Welsby incident, would have preferred a pen and red card rather than penalty try to be honest.

 

I don't think a Red card was ever a realistic option for the Ref given first contact was top of shoulder and the arm then slid up into the head. Those type of tackles are usually classed as 'careless' rather than 'intentional' are very rarely result in a red card.

I can see Welsby just getting a Caution or a Grade A penalty notice at the disciplinary this week. I'd be surprised of he gets any sort of a ban.

[Kenilworth Tiger]

6 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

I don't think a Red card was ever a realistic option for the Ref given first contact was top of shoulder and the arm then slid up into the head. Those type of tackles are usually classed as 'careless' rather than 'intentional' are very rarely result in a red card.

I can see Welsby just getting a Caution or a Grade A penalty notice at the disciplinary this week. I'd be surprised of he gets any sort of a ban.

Fair enough - not seen it back and tough to see on the big screen.

[Chrispmartha]

16 minutes ago, Kenilworth Tiger said:

Fair enough - not seen it back and tough to see on the big screen.

 

[Chrispmartha]

Also Ian Smith clearing up the rule debate

 

 

[Chrispmartha]

Im bitterly disappointed no one has put the mick morgan commentary on it though

[Magic Superbeetle]

3 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

 

First contact on the ball, both feet on the floor. which clears that up. Penalty sufficient for the high shot. 

Still think its crazy it was given as a penalty try with Broadbent having stopped his momentum to step Welsby, and Hurrell and Lomax are sliding over, but hey ho

[Chrispmartha]

3 minutes ago, Magic Superbeetle said:

First contact on the ball, both feet on the floor. which clears that up. Penalty sufficient for the high shot. 

Still think its crazy it was given as a penalty try with Broadbent having stopped his momentum to step Welsby, and Hurrell and Lomax are sliding over, but hey ho

That in no way shows first contact though its a really bad still to prove your point, As you can’t see any contact.

[Chrispmartha]

10 minutes ago, Magic Superbeetle said:

First contact on the ball, both feet on the floor. which clears that up. Penalty sufficient for the high shot. 

Still think its crazy it was given as a penalty try with Broadbent having stopped his momentum to step Welsby, and Hurrell and Lomax are sliding over, but hey ho

Just on the penalty try situation youve got to take the impact welsby had out of the equation because it was illegal , so if Welsby didn’t touch Broadbent or wasn’t there do you think Broadbent would have scored? The ref thought so and id be inclined to agree.

[Josef K]

4 hours ago, Old Frightful said:

This is Hurrel you're talking about, it would have been a try, no doubt.

Unless, of course, it was Jordan Turner.

A Turner/Hurrell 100yrd race would be interesting to watch, would either reach the finish line. 

[Saint Toppy]

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

That in no way shows first contact though its a really bad still to prove your point, As you can’t see any contact.

Think the first angle from the camera behind Broadbent shows it better, first contact is clearly on the shoulder and it then slips up higher into the head

[Chrispmartha]

Anyway - argument is settled, charged with high tackle, no further action.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Chrispmartha

[Damien]

2 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

Also Ian Smith clearing up the rule debate

 

 

I do wonder if the referee even knew this himself because it seems awfully strange not to get the video referee to even take a look at it.

[Dunbar]

15 minutes ago, Damien said:

I do wonder if the referee even knew this himself because it seems awfully strange not to get the video referee to even take a look at it.

I think the ref just took it upon himself to make the decision and I think he got it just about right.

Definitely a penalty try.  Definitely not a red... maybe a yellow but if he decided it wasn't then I am OK with that.

[Chris22]

Last year, Welsby would have seen yellow for that. And I think it deserves a yellow. Contact was secondary but it was, at best, careless. The campaigning from the likes of Lee Radford has seen tackles like that punished by a penalty only. Not something I agree with.

It was a 50/50 call for a penalty try. Hurrell was covering and may have got there. Liam Moore thought not which isn't obviously wrong and I've not a problem with a ref backing their judgement.