Fri 23rd Feb: SL: Warrington Wolves v Hull FC KO 8pm (Sky)

[meast]

Let's be honest here, that Brown red card was probably an error by the officials and a possible costly one.

But there's an awful lot of knee jerking going on with people saying they won't watch the sport anymore, the game's gone kind stuff.

It's not like these decisions are the norm is it? Last night was a poor decision granted, but it's hopefully just a one off.

People are carrying on like this is happening in every game when it's not the case.

I think a lot of people just can't get over the fact that players now can't bash each other round the head for entertainment purposes.

The game has to be cleaned up, just sometimes you're going to get crazy decisions or mistakes from the officials, it's always happened and it always will.

[phiggins]

2 minutes ago, meast said:

Let's be honest here, that Brown red card was probably an error by the officials and a possible costly one.

But there's an awful lot of knee jerking going on with people saying they won't watch the sport anymore, the game's gone kind stuff.

It's not like these decisions are the norm is it? Last night was a poor decision granted, but it's hopefully just a one off.

People are carrying on like this is happening in every game when it's not the case.

I think a lot of people just can't get over the fact that players now can't bash each other round the head for entertainment purposes.

The game has to be cleaned up, just sometimes you're going to get crazy decisions or mistakes from the officials, it's always happened and it always will.

Was it an error by officials, given the new rules?

[Dave T]

26 minutes ago, Derwent said:

The penalty try bemused me. The ref can be clearly heard asking the VR to “check the merits of a penalty try”. The VR then says the Ref has awarded a penalty try on the field and he can’t see a reason to overturn it. But the Ref never said he’d awarded it, he asked the VR to advise him. 

Yeah, and it did seem to come after the ref had watched it on screen. I do think it's a penalty try, but agree with you, the process was weird. 

I do think the ref just lost his way a bit. Hopefully some work this week to address it. 

[redjonn]

2 hours ago, OriginalMrC said:

Worth pointing out the decision last night was a mistake by the ref. There's always been bad decisions by refs and always will be regardless of rules in place. 

That depends if the ref on reflection thinks he made a mistake... or he believes he applied the rules as expected of him and hence he believes he didn't make a mistake...

I suspect he thinks he followed the protocols and didn't make a mistake.    

The protocols need a little more nuance...

[redjonn]

9 minutes ago, meast said:

Let's be honest here, that Brown red card was probably an error by the officials and a possible costly one.

But there's an awful lot of knee jerking going on with people saying they won't watch the sport anymore, the game's gone kind stuff.

It's not like these decisions are the norm is it? Last night was a poor decision granted, but it's hopefully just a one off.

People are carrying on like this is happening in every game when it's not the case.

I think a lot of people just can't get over the fact that players now can't bash each other round the head for entertainment purposes.

The game has to be cleaned up, just sometimes you're going to get crazy decisions or mistakes from the officials, it's always happened and it always will.

I agree with your comments but irrespective of the new protocols the game to me seems to have lost some of its free flowing, that is we seem to catching up on as many stops and restarts as the other code.   Maybe for different reasons but never-the-less over the last couple of seasons we have a lot more stoppage... for me its an issue, all be it nowt to do with new head injury protocol.

[meast]

1 hour ago, dkw said:

Brilliant stuff by Faamanu Brown, it's a great post by him, very level headed and respectable.

 

Not sure about calling the ref "bro" though?

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

A couple of people claimed earlier in the thread that they can't say it was wrong. 

I tried to read the disciplinary files, but I gave up tbh. 

You can be found not guilty, however due to early gradings and lack of personal appearances for each incidents  sending off sufficient is more common nowadays

[meast]

38 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Was it an error by officials, given the new rules?

I would say so yes, either the on field officials or the off field officials who are telling these guys to make these calls.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Spidey said:

You can be found not guilty, however due to early gradings and lack of personal appearances for each incidents  sending off sufficient is more common nowadays

Ah OK, I asked that in this thread and was told you can't be found not guilty. That would do it really. 

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Ah OK, I asked that in this thread and was told you can't be found not guilty. That would do it really. 

I think if you’ve been referred after the video reviews (when there’s not been a card) it’s extremely unlikely to be found not guilty or you wouldn’t be referred I the first place. But you can definitely be found not guilty of an offence that has resulted in a card 

[jacksy]

3 hours ago, OriginalMrC said:

Worth pointing out the decision last night was a mistake by the ref. There's always been bad decisions by refs and always will be regardless of rules in place. 

There was more than one.

[The Blues Ox]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I asked this during the game, and didn't see it answered, but can a referee now watch the big screen? Because that appeared to be happening last night. 

Really they should be allowed to, it gives them a moment to pause and breathe without making a rash decision. Not a problem with this at all. I didn't have a problem with him watching it back then asking the VR to have a look at the merits of a penalty try. In my opinion though there is no way we can say without reasonable doubt that the player would have scored because of the initial contact on the shoulder, if that initial contact is on the neck then its a foul to start with and I think a penalty try would be fine. I think a penalty and a yellow card would have been a better decision.

2 hours ago, phiggins said:

Was it an error by officials, given the new rules?

This is the problem isn't it? Players have been warned about head to head contact and duty of care of the defender to keep his head out of the head space of the attacking player. Brown does not do that when he possibly could have. We need some common sense though.

50 minutes ago, jacksy said:

There was more than one.

Yeah I think there was at least 5 or 6 decisions that could have had a bearing on the result either through penalty tries given/not given or a number of incidents that could have/should have resulted in a card or different color card. Its just a very poor performance but we all have that in us but the one thing that bothered me was that late in the game we saw 2 incidents that looked really clear at the minimum yellow cards that were not acted on almost as if we are saying its late in the game lets not stir the pot more. I would not surprise if the late shot results in a ban which again just makes a bit of a mockery of the game went.

[Ullman]

15 hours ago, Dave T said:

Really good interview with Burgess. Great coverage. 

He came across very well in that interview.

Seemed to have plenty of time for the fans afterwards too. Always good to see.

[Harry Stottle]

6 hours ago, gingerjon said:

It's a bad decision.

That's an overreaction to a bad decision.

@Wellsy4HullFC didn't say or harp on about one bad decision, he is talking about where the game seems to be heading with these rules, I am with him 100% with him, I have already got my season ticket for this year, but with the next set of rules coming next season I won't be buying one then  I can only envisage it will be worse than this season in my view.

[Padge]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

Ah OK, I asked that in this thread and was told you can't be found not guilty. That would do it really. 

I was one who said you couldn't, my mistake, but it did used to be the case I believe, the advent of video evidence probably changed things as incidents can be looked at in hindsight where as they couldn't be pre-video.

[Harry Stottle]

6 hours ago, Dave T said:

But, we've seen bad decisions before, and we'll see them again. 

Never a truer word said, if these rules are adhered to like they have been in the first 2 rounds, now where is Carvell and Walmsley when you need them.

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, phiggins said:

Was it an error by officials, given the new rules?

No I don't think it was.

[gingerjon]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

@Wellsy4HullFC didn't say or harp on about one bad decision, he is talking about where the game seems to be heading with these rules, I am with him 100% with him, I have already got my season ticket for this year, but with the next set of rules coming next season I won't be buying one then  I can only envisage it will be worse than this season in my view.

If you want to watch men hitting each other in the head then other sports and niche websites are available.

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

If you want to watch men hitting each other in the head then other sports and niche websites are available.

Can't stop and answer just going out to a community game.

[Ullman]

15 hours ago, M j M said:

 

Oh that's brilliant.

[gingerjon]

11 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Can't stop and answer just going out to a community game.

Odd thing for someone who is falling out of love with the game to do.

[Futtocks]

3 hours ago, phiggins said:

Was it an error by officials, given the new rules?

The disciplinary panel report may give a little clarity on that. As would a press release from the game's administrators.

Right now, people are pronouncing on it (from both sides), based on speculation.

[Fly-By-TheWire]

Is it true that only one insurer will cover the RFL?   If this is the case I guess and they're dictating the terms then we're stuffed and have to accept it.   What else can we do?

I mentioned it earlier, slightly in jest, but if the above is true then we really need to come up with some revolutionary thinking.   Can we get the NRL's insurers to cover us in some way?   Maybe the NRL could assist with the premiums as they seemingly want to get involved over here?   Other than that just make tackling the legs the only allowed method.

I'm not that hot on legal stuff (I'm not Zak Hardaker before you ask) so I'm not sure whether getting players to sign a waiver for 'accidental contact' would stand up in future cases?

Edited February 24 by Fly-By-TheWire

[Ullman]

15 hours ago, MZH said:

On the subject of the penalty try, I thought Hoy going high gave him a chance to score in a way that a good low tackle wouldn't have. He had a chance to duck under and score, but he lost his footing and knocked on. A penalty try is meant to be awarded when foul play prevents a try scoring opportunity. In this case the foul play presented a try scoring opportunity.

Good perspective.

Hoy made an absolute mess of that. He was coming from the side with the whole body to aim at, the easiest tackle you can make in rugby, yet he somehow manages to go over the shoulder. 

[StandOffHalf]

Really good, measured comments from Faamanu Brown post-match.