Why Featherstone Rovers forward faces minimum six-match ban if found guilty of Grade F charge

[Total Rugby League]

THE DISCIPLINARY MATCH REVIEW PANEL has had a busy day following last weekend’s Challenge Cup Third Round. All in all, 13 players were charged with...

View the full article

[Michael Bates]

“Law 15.1 (f) Verbal abuse based on race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, national or ethnic origin or any other form of Unacceptable Language and/or Behaviour Grade F.”

If he's found guilty of this he absolutely deserves 6 games. Play the game hard but there's no need for personal abuse. Disappointing that it's a trialist that the club has given a chance to and this is what he, allegedly, repays the club by doing. If the referee has heard it and sent him off, I can't see anything other than a guilty verdict.

[Marauder]

On 16/02/2024 at 09:55, Michael Bates said:

“Law 15.1 (f) Verbal abuse based on race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, national or ethnic origin or any other form of Unacceptable Language and/or Behaviour Grade F.”

If he's found guilty of this he absolutely deserves 6 games. Play the game hard but there's no need for personal abuse. Disappointing that it's a trialist that the club has given a chance to and this is what he, allegedly, repays the club by doing. If the referee has heard it and sent him off, I can't see anything other than a guilty verdict.

 

Hi

 

Do you know the full story of this case, if not I will tell you.

·       Firstly, go onto you tube and watch the highlights of the game, take note that during the highlights the player (number 22) never once gets involved verbally or physically around the play the ball.

·       The incident happens in the last 5 minutes or so, when the number 22 takes the ball up just in front of Thatto Heaths goals, whilst doing so number 22 takes another tackle around the head (He is 6 foot 4)

·       Number 22 gets to his feet, never gets involved physically but is awarded a penalty, while on his feet he says to his attacker “Fukcing Cabbage”

·       The referee then red cards the number 22 for insinuating his attacker was a Spastic.

·       Firstly, in the text “Fukcing Cabbage” was said was in line with the urban dictionary, translated “Fukcing Idiot”

·       Secondly it was the referee and only the referee who has interpreted “Fukcing Cabbage” into “Fukcing Spastic” this was pointed out to the referee by the Featherstone captain when asked the reason the number 22 was sent off.

·       The referee has previous in getting a player a 6-match ban whilst being the 4^th official, on that occasion two players had been sin binned and the guilty player called the other player “A Welsh see u next Tuesday”

Not sure about your feelings but this is probably going to be the second occasion that food will be taken off the kitchen table because an official has thin skin.

By the way, number the number 22 is not a trialist he has signed for Featherstone even after being offered a far better deal in a brown envelop from a local union side.

Edited February 19 by Marauder

[Michael Bates]

1 hour ago, Marauder said:

Do you know the full story of this case, if not I will tell you.

In that case I'm sure the tribunal will find him not guilty and all will be fine? I'm sure there are words you shouldn't be using in that post however, I hope his defence team doesn't either. Pretty sure you shouldn't be trying to get round the swear filter either.

Edited February 19 by Michael Bates

[Marauder]

2 minutes ago, Michael Bates said:

In that case I'm sure the tribunal will find him not guilty and all will be fine?

You would think so but I do not have much faith in the system, it seems to fail in it’s consistency in handing out punishments, in every day life it would have been thrown out before it got to the CPS.

[lingaro]

2 hours ago, Marauder said:

 

Hi

 

Do you know the full story of this case, if not I will tell you.

·       Firstly, go onto you tube and watch the highlights of the game, take note that during the highlights the player (number 22) never once gets involved verbally or physically around the play the ball.

·       The incident happens in the last 5 minutes or so, when the number 22 takes the ball up just in front of Thatto Heaths goals, whilst doing so number 22 takes another tackle around the head (He is 6 foot 4)

·       Number 22 gets to his feet, never gets involved physically but is awarded a penalty, while on his feet he says to his attacker “Fukcing Cabbage”

·       The referee then red cards the number 22 for insinuating his attacker was a Spastic.

·       Firstly, in the text “Fukcing Cabbage” was said was in line with the urban dictionary, translated “Fukcing Idiot”

·       Secondly it was the referee and only the referee who has interpreted “Fukcing Cabbage” into “Fukcing Spastic” this was pointed out to the referee by the Featherstone captain when asked the reason the number 22 was sent off.

·       The referee has previous in getting a player a 6-match ban whilst being the 4^th official, on that occasion two players had been sin binned and the guilty player called the other player “A Welsh see u next Tuesday”

Not sure about your feelings but this is probably going to be the second occasion that food will be taken off the kitchen table because an official has thin skin.

By the way, number the number 22 is not a trialist he has signed for Featherstone even after being offered a far better deal in a brown envelop from a local union side.

Hopefully the refs mic picks everything up, it's ridiculous that a player loses pay over such a trivial matter.  If he had reacted to the high shot with a punch he would be facing a much lesser charge.  They're not playing tiddlywinks.  The RL media can't wait to Make headlines out of anything negative once again on planet Fev. 

[haskey]

Do not understand what (decision on charge and decision on sanction) mean re Roberts. I also notice that |Minnikin has been given a 2 match ban.

It seems that teams are going to struggle putting out a  full team , the way things are going with the panel.

[Marauder]

On 19/02/2024 at 17:10, lingaro said:

Hopefully the refs mic picks everything up, it's ridiculous that a player loses pay over such a trivial matter.  If he had reacted to the high shot with a punch he would be facing a much lesser charge.  They're not playing tiddlywinks.  The RL media can't wait to Make headlines out of anything negative once again on planet Fev. 

Fingers crossed, the lad said if he's found guilty he'd have got less for punching the guy

 

[Marauder]

4 hours ago, haskey said:

Do not understand what (decision on charge and decision on sanction) mean re Roberts. I also notice that |Minnikin has been given a 2 match ban.

It seems that teams are going to struggle putting out a  full team , the way things are going with the panel.

I think sanction is the grade of the offence.

[Grimmy]

On 19/02/2024 at 14:52, Marauder said:

   Secondly it was the referee and only the referee who has interpreted “Fukcing Cabbage” into “Fukcing Spastic” this was pointed out to the referee by the Featherstone captain when asked the reason the number 22 was sent off.

I have a bit of knowledge of this as my cousin was the ref. A correction for you - it was Roberts and only Roberts who claimed he had said cabbage rather than the word in question. He later saw sense and admitted it, apologised and pled guilty last night. You carry on blaming the officials though if it suits your narrative. 

[Marauder]

8 hours ago, Grimmy said:

I have a bit of knowledge of this as my cousin was the ref. A correction for you - it was Roberts and only Roberts who claimed he had said cabbage rather than the word in question. He later saw sense and admitted it, apologised and pled guilty last night. You carry on blaming the officials though if it suits your narrative. 

It was not my narrative, I was told by the lad himself Saturday morning at a under 15s game, at the time he was waiting for what the club wanted to do about it, maybe the club advised him to plead guilty.

 

[lingaro]

8 hours ago, Grimmy said:

I have a bit of knowledge of this as my cousin was the ref. A correction for you - it was Roberts and only Roberts who claimed he had said cabbage rather than the word in question. He later saw sense and admitted it, apologised and pled guilty last night. You carry on blaming the officials though if it suits your narrative. 

Shame he didn't think contact to the head was an issue. 

[sheddingswasus]

This all seems to be a recurring theme. Someone transgresses and the reciprient retaliates. The retaliator is treated more severely than the original offender. 
We same this in the Hull derby last week 

[Daft old hooker]

3 hours ago, lingaro said:

Shame he didn't think contact to the head was an issue. 

Note to the players next time just knock em out 

[Michael Bates]

12 hours ago, sheddingswasus said:

This all seems to be a recurring theme. Someone transgresses and the reciprient retaliates. The retaliator is treated more severely than the original offender. 
We same this in the Hull derby last week 

You have to punish retaliation more harshly or people will think it's acceptable for them to hand out the punishment. I appreciate though, if someone is punching you then you're not going to just stand there and take it.

Any news on Roberts' punishment then? If he's pled guilty has he got 6 games? I don't seem to be able to find it within all the Super League furore. 

 

[Grimmy]

10 minutes ago, Michael Bates said:

You have to punish retaliation more harshly or people will think it's acceptable for them to hand out the punishment. I appreciate though, if someone is punching you then you're not going to just stand there and take it.

Any news on Roberts' punishment then? If he's pled guilty has he got 6 games? I don't seem to be able to find it within all the Super League furore. 

 

Nothing to do with who attacks and retaliates, it's just a different offence. The rules say a high tackle can just be a penalty (depending on severity), and that discriminatory language is always a red card. Fev received the penalty for the high tackle, but had a man sent off for the discriminatory language.

Hull same again. The game says a knee to the head is an automatic red, whereas a facial can be anything between a penalty and a red card depending on severity.

The alternative would be 'Any time someone high tackles me I have free reign to do or say what I want in retribution', which would lead to some pretty bad things happening. 

[Michael Bates]

30 minutes ago, Grimmy said:

The alternative would be 'Any time someone high tackles me I have free reign to do or say what I want in retribution', which would lead to some pretty bad things happening. 

Yes, we agree here.

[The Phantom Horseman]

40 minutes ago, Michael Bates said:

 

Any news on Roberts' punishment then? If he's pled guilty has he got 6 games? I don't seem to be able to find it within all the Super League furore. 

 

I've been looking for this too, the RFL website doesn't seem to have updated it. As you indicate, they put up the results of the SL Operational Rules tribunals after they happened on Tuesday, but they as yet haven't revealed what happened to yesterday's batch of lower-division tribunals.

Wakefield have tweeted that Mason Lino's ban was reduced from 3 games to 2 but I don't think any of the other teams involved have put out the results, to be fair there's not a lot of upside for a club in splashing it over social media that a player has received a 6+ game ban so I am not surprised the club haven't provided an update but it's poor that the RFL haven't provided this info yet.

[The Phantom Horseman]

4 hours ago, Michael Bates said:

 

Any news on Roberts' punishment then? If he's pled guilty has he got 6 games? I don't seem to be able to find it within all the Super League furore. 

 

Finally published. 6 games and a £500 fine.

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/62487/disciplinary-|-operational-rules-tribunal-&-match-review-panel

The maximum fine in the Championship is normally £250, but if you're found guilty of a Grade F offence it doubles.

Edited February 22 by The Phantom Horseman

[haskey]

Is there any surprise that the players are looking into strike action. Not just the severity of the 6 games , but he will lose 6 weeks pay and expected to pay £500 which is no small amount for a player just starting out.  If it was me I would say goodbye rugby league and to h=ll with the whole rotten business.

[Michael Bates]

4 minutes ago, haskey said:

Is there any surprise that the players are looking into strike action. Not just the severity of the 6 games , but he will lose 6 weeks pay and expected to pay £500 which is no small amount for a player just starting out.  If it was me I would say goodbye rugby league and to h=ll with the whole rotten business.

It's almost as if punishments are there to dissuade people from breaking the rules. We're not even talking about a new interpretation or harshness on head contact here, this punishment has been in place for a while. Given that his plea was guilty, he believes he was in the wrong and has no one to blame but himself. 

[Total Rugby League]

FEATHERSTONE ROVERS forward Dean Roberts has been slapped with a six-match ban for ‘unacceptable language’ following his side’s thrashing of Thatto Heath Crusaders in the...

View the full article

[Monkeymagic22]

20 minutes ago, Michael Bates said:

It's almost as if punishments are there to dissuade people from breaking the rules. We're not even talking about a new interpretation or harshness on head contact here, this punishment has been in place for a while. Given that his plea was guilty, he believes he was in the wrong and has no one to blame but himself. 

Didn’t Josh McGuire get a 7 match ban for a similar offence. Personally, I’ve no sympathy, and reckon the ban and fine is justified. 

[Marauder]

19 hours ago, Daft old hooker said:

Note to the players next time just knock em out 

The player was a very good amateur boxer

[Marauder]

Talking to the number 22s dad and asked how he had got on, he said that the audio of his lad talking wasn't clear but never sounded anything  like "Spastic" but the panel said "It sounds like" not "You said spastic" so he was advised to take the minimum penalty, 6 games and £500. I suppose this is another reason why a union is required, to fight such findings, legally the cost is far to much individually for a player to fight a case, having a union rep there could see him/her/none binary make a decision to fight a case.