Jump to content

Fri 15th Sept: SL: Warrington Wolves v St Helens KO 20:00 (Sky)


Who will win?  

30 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win?

    • Warrington Wolves
      10
    • St Helens
      20

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 15/09/23 at 19:30

Recommended Posts


I’m most shocked that people are still shocked that players are getting banned for braindead things like this. The rules are very well known and players have been banned for lifting players on the floor before and, no doubt, will be in the future. Ultimately, it’s not up to another player to decide whether a player is injured or not. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

A defence that Vaughan may have, and it'll be interesting to see how this goes is that does differ from some of the other examples we've seen here in that Matautia isn't staying down, he's actually getting up, just very slowly. We can see him lifting himself up before Vaughan lays hands on him, so there is an argument that he isn't liftibg a prone player, he is lifting a player moving slowly. 

In principle I'm OK with bans for lifting injured players, but this is quite different to some previous ones, so I'm interested to see how it goes at hearing. 

That’s what I thought. I’d be surprised if he avoids a ban, but wouldn’t be surprised if he’s successful in challenging the grading. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

A defence that Vaughan may have, and it'll be interesting to see how this goes is that does differ from some of the other examples we've seen here in that Matautia isn't staying down, he's actually getting up, just very slowly. We can see him lifting himself up before Vaughan lays hands on him, so there is an argument that he isn't liftibg a prone player, he is lifting a player moving slowly. 

In principle I'm OK with bans for lifting injured players, but this is quite different to some previous ones, so I'm interested to see how it goes at hearing. 

Getting up doesn’t mean not injured. It’s not for Vaughan to diagnose players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leeds Wire said:

If someone did a quick poll of rugby league players at any level and asked if this was worthy of a ban, what percentage do you think would say yes? 

0%. I'm also sure rugby league players should know what they are and aren't allowed to do, and know what they are if they don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a degree of sympathy for Vaughan. In the moment, I doubt he would think of similar incidents that were banned in the past. I don't think it was a malicious act at all. You can argue whether it is right or wrong to ban these offences, but the RFL have done this for several years now. To that end, players should know the consequence of these actions. 

I do also get it from the RFL's perspective. Mose Masoe suffered his life-changing injury in a very innocuous challenge where many may have initially thought he was staying down to slow down an attach.  If a Wakefield player had decided to move Masoe, then the consequences could have been even worse.

A common argument is that the RFL should apply common sense. But if you do that, expect further inconsistency.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Josef K said:

Didn’t Mata’utia get banned last season for doing the same thing!!!. I don’t know how many fans were saying #ImDoneWithTheGame 

Yes and there was probably less in it than this incident but it’s just a big no no take the ban and move on. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Yes and there was probably less in it than this incident but it’s just a big no no take the ban and move on. 

There were a couple of key differences between these incidents. 

Matautia's offence was on a player lay down, not trying to get up. There was a clear sign of an injury. There was no mitigation of time-wasting. But interestingly, he received a grade C charge, two grades lower than Vaughan who imo has a decent case for some defence. I'm not sure whether the grading for this offence has been made more severe in 2023 though, which would be at odds for most other foul play which has been downplayed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rapscallion said:

Getting up doesn’t mean not injured. It’s not for Vaughan to diagnose players. 

It isn't lifting a non-moving injured player though, which is the case for every other one of these I've seen. 

Some high profile ones include Matautia (the ball carrier was lay still), Danny Levi (the ball carrier was lay still), Acton on Bird (ball carrier lay still). 

What will be will be on this, I'm not one who cares too much about bans, if they come, they come, but it'll be an interesting one as it is quite different from others we've seen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dave T said:

There were a couple of key differences between these incidents. 

Matautia's offence was on a player lay down, not trying to get up. There was a clear sign of an injury. There was no mitigation of time-wasting. But interestingly, he received a grade C charge, two grades lower than Vaughan who imo has a decent case for some defence. I'm not sure whether the grading for this offence has been made more severe in 2023 though, which would be at odds for most other foul play which has been downplayed. 

Sorry Dave I’m not up to date with current gradings. My comment was just on the fact it looks harsh but will likely get a ban. I wasn’t commenting on the severity of the ban he’ll get I lost touch with that years ago. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, bobbruce said:

Yes and there was probably less in it than this incident but it’s just a big no no take the ban and move on. 

Oh yes we can definitely take a lesson from St Helens when it comes to taking a ban and moving on.

  • Haha 2

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.