This Week’s Disciplinary

[MZH]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I assumed it was a joke at first, but then saw people had genuinely donated

I saw it on the Hull FC fans page on FB. Embarrassing isn't the word.

If they genuinely feel that strongly about it then at least give the money to a good cause and say you are trying to raise the equivalent of the fine and donating it in protest of refereeing standards or whatever. It would still be idiotic, but not as idiotic as trying to pay his fine. As if Griffin/Hull FC would accept it anyway.

[LeytherRob]

2 hours ago, Roger York said:

Essentially Teanby did get sent off as there was only 7 mins to go so for the ref a red or a yellow did not matter so he took the easy option where as Hardaker came back because the ref bottled it

There have been plenty occasions of players getting sent off with less than 10 mins to go, Morgan Knowles against Fax in the cup, Inu and Esseh for Leigh/Fev in the league match at Leigh last year. Referees will issue the card they deem appropriate for the offence regardless of when it occurs.

[LeytherRob]

9 hours ago, LeeF said:

And both match day decisions are driven by the complaining from the coaches, owners & players during last year’s clampdown whereby the referees are instructed to try & keep players on the field & to issue less red cards. This is the point that doesn’t get remembered in all these threads.  

The instruction wasn't to issue less cards, it was to reduce bans in favour of higher fines to put less strain on the player pool and it applies mainly to lesser infringements. It used to be that Grade A=0-1 match ban, Grade B=1-2 matches and so on, whereas now Grade A is fine only and Grade B is 0-1.

[LeeF]

Just now, LeytherRob said:

The instruction wasn't to issue less cards, it was to reduce bans in favour of higher fines to put less strain on the player pool and it applies mainly to lesser infringements. It used to be that Grade A=0-1 match ban, Grade B=1-2 matches and so on, whereas now Grade A is fine only and Grade B is 0-1.

No they were instructed to issue less cards and keep it at 13 aside if at all possible. That was in the middle of last season.

During the off season they changed the bans & gradings

[JohnM]

57 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

There have been plenty occasions of players getting sent off with less than 10 mins to go, Morgan Knowles against Fax in the cup, Inu and Esseh for Leigh/Fev in the league match at Leigh last year. Referees will issue the card they deem appropriate for the offence regardless of when it occurs.

Two players were red carded today in the closing seconds of the 2nd State of Origin game.

[Old Frightful]

19 hours ago, LeeF said:

So 7 for Griffin despite challenging the grading. 

But he'll only serve 6...

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/hull-fc-use-rfl-loophole-8540582

[bobbruce]

3 hours ago, Old Frightful said:

But he'll only serve 6...

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/hull-fc-use-rfl-loophole-8540582

I don’t see that as a loophole anymore teams have been using that for years now. 

[Futtocks]

 

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

 

So pretty much textbook as you'd expect. Exactly as many of us guessed. 

[Futtocks]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

So pretty much textbook as you'd expect. Exactly as many of us guessed. 

I'm sure some will still defend every word.

[RigbyLuger]

When are Hull FC going to condemn the supporters still abusing Kendall for his decision?

[Old Frightful]

2 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

When are Hull FC going to condemn the supporters still abusing Kendall for his decision?

If they did, I doubt any on here would fall under that category, most of us are realists.

Other social media sites are rife with loons, perhaps that's where you're looking.

[LeeF]

9 hours ago, Futtocks said:

I'm sure some will still defend every word.

Absolutely some will despite it being clear that Kendall acted correctly 

[RP London]

11 hours ago, Futtocks said:

 

got to say the last bit is a straight red for me anyway... maybe if the game was still being played rather than half time the first one may have just been a penalty or a march 10m further (binning would also be fine by me) but calling the ref a cheat is a straight red surely. 

[LeeF]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

got to say the last bit is a straight red for me anyway... maybe if the game was still being played rather than half time the first one may have just been a penalty or a march 10m further (binning would also be fine by me) but calling the ref a cheat is a straight red surely. 

Even the Griffin “defence” isn’t that impressive and would have deserved a red as well.

Also, glad to see that Griffin’s previous was factored into the ban. 
 

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

got to say the last bit is a straight red for me anyway... maybe if the game was still being played rather than half time the first one may have just been a penalty or a march 10m further (binning would also be fine by me) but calling the ref a cheat is a straight red surely. 

On the yellow card, it is important to note that it wasn't the 'first' part.

1. Penalty awarded, Griffin verbally challenges. Ref eplains decision. Griffin mutters something, ref didn't hear so left it.

2. The tackle later sees Griffin go back to the ref to challenge again. Ref tells him its a steal. They argue.

3. Griffin says "f**** b8888" as he walks away - yellow card.

4. Griffin then calls the ref "f**** s*****"

5 Griffin then turns and calls the ref a "f**** cheat".

It's quite a bad series of interactions tbh, and it really should have ended at point one.

The defence was terrible. 

[RigbyLuger]

Some supporters aren't going to be happy unless they hear exactly what was said, and even then, would still justify why he shouldn't be banned or even punished.

[dkw]

14 minutes ago, Dave T said:

On the yellow card, it is important to note that it wasn't the 'first' part.

1. Penalty awarded, Griffin verbally challenges. Ref eplains decision. Griffin mutters something, ref didn't hear so left it.

2. The tackle later sees Griffin go back to the ref to challenge again. Ref tells him its a steal. They argue.

3. Griffin says "f**** b8888" as he walks away - yellow card.

4. Griffin then calls the ref "f**** s*****"

5 Griffin then turns and calls the ref a "f**** cheat".

It's quite a bad series of interactions tbh, and it really should have ended at point one.

The defence was terrible. 

I think reading the case notes hes been very very lucky to only get the ban he did, it should be doubled.

[RP London]

32 minutes ago, Dave T said:

On the yellow card, it is important to note that it wasn't the 'first' part.

1. Penalty awarded, Griffin verbally challenges. Ref eplains decision. Griffin mutters something, ref didn't hear so left it.

2. The tackle later sees Griffin go back to the ref to challenge again. Ref tells him its a steal. They argue.

3. Griffin says "f**** b8888" as he walks away - yellow card.

4. Griffin then calls the ref "f**** s*****"

5 Griffin then turns and calls the ref a "f**** cheat".

It's quite a bad series of interactions tbh, and it really should have ended at point one.

The defence was terrible. 

yes thats true it was on the back of already giving a penalty, I was looking more of it as a situation in itself rather than, as you say, a continued event from the original penalty. 

yes it should have ended with "it was a steal".. anyone who has played has been done for a steal that wasn't, and has been done for a loose carry when it was a steal. Equally I am sure we've all stolen a ball and got away with it, I am 100% Griffin will have done at some  point.. its like getting a speeding fine when you are adamant you weren't, at some point you have to realise you've got away with a few in the past so maybe just take this one on the chin!

[RigbyLuger]

It's just supporters trying to defend the indefensible, and if it was a Saints player who had been sent off, they'd be asking for more.

It's not as if Griffin is a player you'd categorise as a bad lad, so just take the medicine and move on.

[Futtocks]

Following the latest round of Betfred Super League matches, the Match Review Panel have issued the following sanctions:

• Jonny Lomax (St Helens) - Grade A Strikes - No Further Action
• Jordan Lane (Hull FC) - Grade A Strikes - No Further Action
• James Harrison (Warrington Wolves) - Grade D Dangerous Contact - 2 Match Penalty Notice and £250 Fine
• Fouad Yaha (Hull KR) - Grade B High Tackle - £250 Fine
• Yusuf Aydin (Hull KR) - Grade B Dangerous Contact - £250 Fine
• David Fifita (Wakefield Trinity) - Grade A Disputes Decision - No Further Action
• Will Dagger (Wakefield Trinity) - Grade B Dangerous Contact - £250 Fine
• Romain Navarette (Catalans Dragons) - Grade B Dangerous Contact - £250 Fine
• Ed Chamberlain (Leigh Leopards) - Grade A Dangerous Throw - No Further Action

The following players have received a caution:

• Romain Navarette (Catalans Dragons) - Raising Knee in Tackle
• Tim Lafai (Salford Red Devils) - Raising Knee in Tackle

[JohnM]

Well, I for one think it's an outrage. 

[tim2]

38 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Well, I for one think it's an outrage. 

No one banned? It's a disgrace! I blame Ralph Rimmer.

[Saint Toppy]

8 minutes ago, tim2 said:

No one banned? It's a disgrace! I blame Ralph Rimmer.

Errr Harrison got 2 matches !!

[tim2]

2 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

Errr Harrison got 2 matches !!

Don't let facts get in the way of a rugby league rant!

I didn't actually read it before commenting, which I assumed was how it's supposed to be.

Edited June 27, 2023 by tim2