Sat 22 July : Betfred RL Challenge Cup Semi Final : St Helens v Leigh Leopards KO 14:30 BBC1

[Harry Stottle]

I'm done with this, it is stupid.

[Snowys Backside]

History now. I think it’s time to move on !  

[phiggins]

14 minutes ago, Snowys Backside said:

History now. I think it’s time to move on !  

Agreed. When's the draw for the next round?

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Snowys Backside said:

History now. I think it’s time to move on !  

Yep all that needs saying whatever your point of view from whoever, has been said.

[ivans82]

Wanted a Leigh v Hull K R final , but Leighs try when they shoved Tierney out the way was a farce and i wouldn`t have sent Shorrocks off either , such is life .

[Harry Stottle]

22 minutes ago, ivans82 said:

Wanted a Leigh v Hull K R final , but Leighs try when they shoved Tierney out the way was a farce and i wouldn`t have sent Shorrocks off either , such is life .

For Tierney read Tee Ritson!

[Saint Toppy]

Early reports coming out of Saints that those 'legal' tackles have damaged both his MCL and ACL and Paasi needs major surgery. They wont know the full extent of the damage until they do more investigations over the next week or so. Probably looking at 9-10 months out, at worst his career is over.

Also just been told that Walmsley's injury is to his MCL, further scans required to determine the extent so possibility he may be back for the end of the season. LMS has a Pec injury, not sure of its a full tear or not. If it is then thats his season & career over  as he'll retire

Edited July 25, 2023 by Saint Toppy

[Expatknight]

1 hour ago, ivans82 said:

Wanted a Leigh v Hull K R final , but Leighs try when they shoved Tierney out the way was a farce and i wouldn`t have sent Shorrocks off either , such is life .

 

 

Shoulder Charge If two players are running side by side near to and towards the ball it is permissible for one to charge the other with the shoulder.

[phiggins]

1 minute ago, Expatknight said:

 

 

Shoulder Charge If two players are running side by side near to and towards the ball it is permissible for one to charge the other with the shoulder.

Yep, and that's how the video ref saw it as well. Briscoe was trying to beat Ritson to the ball but missed it himself. Fairly certain he wasn't thinking of shepherding the defender out of the way so Hardaker could ground the ball millimetres from the dead ball line. 

A fortunate one, but valid call for VR to give, particularly after the on field decision was a try.

[LeytherRob]

23 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Yep, and that's how the video ref saw it as well. Briscoe was trying to beat Ritson to the ball but missed it himself. Fairly certain he wasn't thinking of shepherding the defender out of the way so Hardaker could ground the ball millimetres from the dead ball line. 

A fortunate one, but valid call for VR to give, particularly after the on field decision was a try.

This is key, there is absolutely no reason for Briscoe's main focus to be shepherding Ritson off the ball because he had no idea where Hardaker or any other player was and the ball was heading out for a 7-tackle set.

[LeytherRob]

1 hour ago, Saint Toppy said:

Early reports coming out of Saints that those 'legal' tackles have damaged both his MCL and ACL and Paasi needs major surgery. They wont know the full extent of the damage until they do more investigations over the next week or so. Probably looking at 9-10 months out, at worst his career is over.

Also just been told that Walmsley's injury is to his MCL, further scans required to determine the extent so possibility he may be back for the end of the season. LMS has a Pec injury, not sure of its a full tear or not. If it is then thats his season & career over  as he'll retire

You'd think no one had ever gotten injured from something that didn't result in a penalty before.....

[Dave T]

Interesting that Silverwood thought it was no-try, although he does have a tendency to try and grab attention by taking a fan-pleasing position and criticising the RFL and refs.

I thought it was fine. Briscoe looked at the ball and I do think that was his aim, but he used his body/shoulder to push the Saints player out of the way. I don't think we need to over-analyse, they were both going for the ball, Briscoe shouldered him out of the way - all good as far as Im concerned.

[ivans82]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

For Tierney read Tee Ritson!

Wondered who would spot that one first......got my ex-Town wingers mixed up , saves me right for coming on here before my 2nd cup of coffee .

[Snowys Backside]

2 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

Early reports coming out of Saints that those 'legal' tackles have damaged both his MCL and ACL and Paasi needs major surgery. They wont know the full extent of the damage until they do more investigations over the next week or so. Probably looking at 9-10 months out, at worst his career is over.

Also just been told that Walmsley's injury is to his MCL, further scans required to determine the extent so possibility he may be back for the end of the season. LMS has a Pec injury, not sure of its a full tear or not. If it is then thats his season & career over  as he'll retire

Its all part of the game I'm afraid and unfortunate.

I remember breaking my Jaw when Andy Farrell tackled me in a town team match, and like the Passi incident, it was unfortunate and part of the game. It happens !!

St Helens have some fantastic youngsters. Give them a go, because lets be honest, as great a Team as St Helens are, your greats can only be great for so long.

I think it may be time for transition and for the youth set at Saints to earn their corn !

Good luck for the rest of the season. No doubt you will probably win the grand final with the youngsters and by dropping players like the bang average Lomax and Dodd !!

[hullste]

2 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

You'd think no one had ever gotten injured from something that didn't result in a penalty before.....

I think that if one players tackle technique has caused knee ligament injuries to two players during the same game whether the contact is deemed legal or not then it is legitimate for us to raise concerns about the applied technique. We're do we draw the line?? When another 1, 2 ,3 players suffer similar injuries from players now adopting that technique. The player lead with his head/shoulder, made contact with significant force on or around the knee joint and although the hands came out he made no attempt to wrap them around the player. IMO the MRP at the very least could have raised concerns re:the poor technique applied. They didn't so It will be interesting to see if others now adopt this technique moving forwards???

Some would have you believe we are moaning because we lost but that isn't the case. We lost because Leigh were the better team on the day and deserved the win however regardless of whether the tackle was legal (under current laws of the game as it isn't in the NRL) I thought the tackler had a duty of care  when making a tackle two significant injuries one of which is potentially career ending maybe highlights that there is an issue in terms of Duty of care in relation to those two particular challenges which may need to be looked at to prevent further injuries to players in the future.

[LeytherRob]

Just now, hullste said:

I think that if one players tackle technique has caused knee ligament injuries to two players during the same game whether the contact is deemed legal or not then it is legitimate for us to raise concerns about the applied technique. We're do we draw the line?? When another 1, 2 ,3 players suffer similar injuries from players now adopting that technique. The player lead with his head/shoulder, made contact with significant force on or around the knee joint and although the hands came out he made no attempt to wrap them around the player. IMO the MRP at the very least could have raised concerns re:the poor technique applied. They didn't so It will be interesting to see if others now adopt this technique moving forwards???

Some would have you believe we are moaning because we lost but that isn't the case. We lost because Leigh were the better team on the day and deserved the win however regardless of whether the tackle was legal (under current laws of the game as it isn't in the NRL) I thought the tackler had a duty of care  when making a tackle two significant injuries one of which is potentially career ending maybe highlights that there is an issue in terms of Duty of care in relation to those two particular challenges which may need to be looked at to prevent further injuries to players in the future.

John Asiata has made 602 tackles just in SL this year and the vast majority have been low tackles, there haven't been any injuries caused until this weekends game to my knowledge. It's unfortunate that Paasi and Walmsley have picked up injuries but injuries happen in RL, it's a contact sport with 17 stone athletes running into each other at full tilt. As for 'leading with his head', that's just utter nonsense.

 

[Dave T]

It's a perfectly valid discussion, but I suppose it's natural that some Saints fans are angry that their players suffered injuries and Leigh fans defensive about their own player. 

But incidents like this absolutely should be reviewed and discussed, with rules adapted if required. Things like crusher tackles never used to be a thing, or chicken wings, or even cannonballs. Those tackles became illegal because of the risk of injury. 

We shouldn't knee-jerk, but we also shouldn't just dismiss any concerns. 

[phiggins]

31 minutes ago, hullste said:

I think that if one players tackle technique has caused knee ligament injuries to two players during the same game whether the contact is deemed legal or not then it is legitimate for us to raise concerns about the applied technique. We're do we draw the line?? When another 1, 2 ,3 players suffer similar injuries from players now adopting that technique. The player lead with his head/shoulder, made contact with significant force on or around the knee joint and although the hands came out he made no attempt to wrap them around the player. IMO the MRP at the very least could have raised concerns re:the poor technique applied. They didn't so It will be interesting to see if others now adopt this technique moving forwards???

Some would have you believe we are moaning because we lost but that isn't the case. We lost because Leigh were the better team on the day and deserved the win however regardless of whether the tackle was legal (under current laws of the game as it isn't in the NRL) I thought the tackler had a duty of care  when making a tackle two significant injuries one of which is potentially career ending maybe highlights that there is an issue in terms of Duty of care in relation to those two particular challenges which may need to be looked at to prevent further injuries to players in the future.

The issue here is that the MRP don't believe the injuries (or certainly the Paasi one, can't remember what was said about the Walmsley one) were caused by an individual's tackle technique. They have ruled, and it was similar to what I suggested on Sunday, that the injury was caused by the combination of the two challenges, so they must believe that;

• Asiata's initial contact was above the knee and with his shoulder, not at the knee and certainly not with his head
• He attempted to wrap his arms in the tackle. And while his left arm drops to the ground, his right arm wraps around the leg. (probably made things worse for Paasi)

There's probably a debate to be had about whether 2 legitimate tackles that bend an attacker in various different directions is ok. Not sure how you'd legislate against it though. And I wouldn't have a problem at all if the RFL decided to get independant medics to look at the incident, look at the injury and give an assessment of whether the injury was caused by the impact, or the combination of challenges, if that helps them decide if any rules need to be introduced.

But given the two points above, I'm not sure what you would outlaw, but a review wouldn't do any harm. But it's a fine balance that needs to be met when making any changes. Obviously, anything that reduces the risk of injury is a good thing, but you still need to be able to defend, and you also want to consider the impact of any changes to how difficult you make the job of officials.

[phiggins]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's a perfectly valid discussion, but I suppose it's natural that some Saints fans are angry that their players suffered injuries and Leigh fans defensive about their own player. 

But incidents like this absolutely should be reviewed and discussed, with rules adapted if required. Things like crusher tackles never used to be a thing, or chicken wings, or even cannonballs. Those tackles became illegal because of the risk of injury. 

We shouldn't knee-jerk, but we also shouldn't just dismiss any concerns. 

You articulated that better than me!

[Saint Toppy]

42 minutes ago, phiggins said:

The issue here is that the MRP don't believe the injuries (or certainly the Paasi one, can't remember what was said about the Walmsley one) were caused by an individual's tackle technique. They have ruled, and it was similar to what I suggested on Sunday, that the injury was caused by the combination of the two challenges, so they must believe that;

• Asiata's initial contact was above the knee and with his shoulder, not at the knee and certainly not with his head
• He attempted to wrap his arms in the tackle. And while his left arm drops to the ground, his right arm wraps around the leg. (probably made things worse for Paasi)

There's probably a debate to be had about whether 2 legitimate tackles that bend an attacker in various different directions is ok. Not sure how you'd legislate against it though. And I wouldn't have a problem at all if the RFL decided to get independant medics to look at the incident, look at the injury and give an assessment of whether the injury was caused by the impact, or the combination of challenges, if that helps them decide if any rules need to be introduced.

But given the two points above, I'm not sure what you would outlaw, but a review wouldn't do any harm. But it's a fine balance that needs to be met when making any changes. Obviously, anything that reduces the risk of injury is a good thing, but you still need to be able to defend, and you also want to consider the impact of any changes to how difficult you make the job of officials.

I'm not usually an advocate of following all rules NRL but in this instance I would be. They've clarified their rules in that it places the duty of care on the tacklers, no matter how many there are in the tackle. If collectively they cause an injury by placing the ball carrier in an 'un-natural' position then the tackler deemed most responsible finds themselves up on a charge.

[StandOffHalf]

19 hours ago, hullste said:

 

https://fb.watch/l_qRGOQntC/

Not first man though?

Horrific angle. Head down and smashes into the side of the joint with his head/shoulder. Paasi's career might well be over.

Amazing effort and desire, but the sort of technique that should not be held up as how to tackle.

I think he should have been banned for reckless and dangerous play. These disciplinary decisions do set rather a dangerous precedent. It is okay to go flying in and contact the joint with shoulder/head as long as one has arms outstretched.

[StandOffHalf]

Some very good and wise comments over recent pages of this thread by @phiggins, @Dave T, @hullste, @meast and @Saint Toppy.

I feel that the judiciary have been too laissez-faire. The severity of the injury only makes it worse, of course. I hope Paasi gets all the care he needs and can play again. Missile-like dives into joints being okayed isn't something that sits right with me. At the very least, I would have liked the panel to caution Asiata about dangerous play.

Thanks for all the comments. Always good to get a variety of takes.

[GeordieSaint]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

It's a perfectly valid discussion, but I suppose it's natural that some Saints fans are angry that their players suffered injuries and Leigh fans defensive about their own player. 

But incidents like this absolutely should be reviewed and discussed, with rules adapted if required. Things like crusher tackles never used to be a thing, or chicken wings, or even cannonballs. Those tackles became illegal because of the risk of injury. 

We shouldn't knee-jerk, but we also shouldn't just dismiss any concerns. 

The more I see the replays of the tackles, the more I am disgusted to be honest. He’s effectively diving into the player’s limbs. How the RFL decided he hit Paasi’s thigh when it’s quite clear much of his body is driving right through Paasi’s standing knee…  I have played, coached and refereed in this sport and I think it’s a horrific technique. I genuinely don’t think the player is trying to hurt the players but that technique is awful and resulted in some horrific injuries this weekend. I expect it’ll be outlawed like the chicken wing and cannonball techniques in the future. 

[LeytherRob]

Just now, GeordieSaint said:

The more I see the replays of the tackles, the more I am disgusted to be honest. He’s effectively diving into the player’s limbs. How the RFL decided he hit Paasi’s thigh when it’s quite clear much of his body is driving right through Paasi’s standing knee…  I have played, coached and refereed in this sport and I think it’s a horrific technique. I genuinely don’t think the player is trying to hurt the players but that technique is awful and resulted in some horrific injuries this weekend. I expect it’ll be outlawed like the chicken wing and cannonball techniques in the future. 

It wasn't a standing knee though, both Paasi and Walmsley were running at full tilt. 

To quote Paul Wellens from April this year - “What I would say in this situation is no coach or player wants players to suffer injuries but injuries are part and parcel of the sport. Ours is a collision sport and things can go wrong at times."

[GeordieSaint]

9 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

It wasn't a standing knee though, both Paasi and Walmsley were running at full tilt. 

Paasi can’t fly… at some point his legs are going to hit the ground. When his left leg does, Asiata goes straight through that standing left knee. I am genuinely not stating it was intentional. Asiata was desperate to stop Paasi scoring. What I am however, stating is the technique is reckless, and dangerous. I expect it’ll be outlawed (rightly) in due course. 

Edited July 25, 2023 by GeordieSaint