MRP - Week3

[LeeF]

In conjunction with Yorkshire Tea and Fox’s Biscuits

 

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/62518/disciplinary-|-match-review-panel

 

 

[phiggins]

How do the charges reflect on what the MRP deem to be yellow or red card offences during the game? Do they think all of these incidents were worthy of at least a yellow? Or can you be charged for an offence that should just be a penalty?

[LeytherRob]

I'll be interested to see the minutes once they are available(says page not found currently when using the link). Would be interesting to see if they've even looked at some of the other head clashes or just the ones that were being posted on x/twitter.

[sam4731]

John Asiata-

"Dangerous Contact - A defending player endangers the safety of an opponent by making contact to the lower limb(s) of the opponent in an uncontrolled manner in a situation where there is no genuine attempt to make a tackle, and which involves an unacceptable risk of injury to the opponent."

Grade A...

[phiggins]

9 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

John Asiata-

"Dangerous Contact - A defending player endangers the safety of an opponent by making contact to the lower limb(s) of the opponent in an uncontrolled manner in a situation where there is no genuine attempt to make a tackle, and which involves an unacceptable risk of injury to the opponent."

Grade A...

For some reason, they just use a boilerplate text to describe the charge, but then no text to explain how they reach the grading. There'll no doubt be some charges graded B or C, that have the same description as a Grade A elsewhere. 

Doesn't help with transparency.

[Zilla Budgie]

Saints fans on Redvee are very unhappy at John Asiata not receiving a ban, with quite a few saying how much they "Hate Leigh"  That challenge cup semi final defeat to us last season, is still hurting the scousers.... Bless!!!

 

[sam4731]

2 minutes ago, Zilla Budgie said:

Saints fans on Redvee are very unhappy at John Asiata not receiving a ban, with quite a few saying how much they "Hate Leigh"  That challenge cup semi final defeat to us last season, is still hurting the scousers.... Bless!!!

 

Hmm taking the higher ground by trawling through a rival teams forum looking for people that are unhappy...

[LeytherRob]

Well the minutes are available now here (https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/MATCH REVIEW PANEL MINUTES 4 MAR 2024.pdf) but unlike previous years, this season they are only including the charged incidents and not every incident they look at ( example here from last year where the incidents not charged are still included https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/MATCH REVIEW PANEL MINUTES 02 10 2023.pdf). They really don't help themselves by making the whole process so opaque, if we could see what wasn't being charged and why it would at least help make sense of the application on the new laws.

 

Take the below for example from the 59th minute of Friday's game, granted in no world do i think the Saints player intended to make contact with Moylan's head, however accidentally or not he did make initial contact with the head which has been ban worthy for Hurrell this week and others in previous weeks. I've seen a plethora of similar incidents including head contacts made by Leigh players(this isn't a witch hunt/moan about Friday) but I'm non the wiser as to what is going to be a charge or not come Monday. 

[M j M]

There needs to be so much more transparency about how the charges are arrived at and, more importantly, why some things which aren't charged. They must look at those other things and I'm sure used to give more detail. Now isn't the time to start being even more secretive.

[LeytherRob]

16 minutes ago, Zilla Budgie said:

Saints fans on Redvee are very unhappy at John Asiata not receiving a ban, with quite a few saying how much they "Hate Leigh"  That challenge cup semi final defeat to us last season, is still hurting the scousers.... Bless!!!

 

Is anyone ever happy about anything on Redvee? I've only browsed it a couple of times and found it to be an incredibly toxic echo chamber of a forum. 

[meast]

1 hour ago, sam4731 said:

John Asiata-

"Dangerous Contact - A defending player endangers the safety of an opponent by making contact to the lower limb(s) of the opponent in an uncontrolled manner in a situation where there is no genuine attempt to make a tackle, and which involves an unacceptable risk of injury to the opponent."

Grade A...

Is this from last year?  

[Harry Stottle]

5 hours ago, sam4731 said:

Hmm taking the higher ground by trawling through a rival teams forum looking for people that are unhappy...

Don't worry about it, that is more 'click points' for you.

[phiggins]

Looks like Hurrell is lucky to only get one charge. This looks like a good old fashioned cannonball tackle. 

 

[Magic Superbeetle]

8 hours ago, phiggins said:

Looks like Hurrell is lucky to only get one charge. This looks like a good old fashioned cannonball tackle. 

 

Getting a bit desperate there to see things that aren’t there. The knee joint is bending the correct way in a controlled and structured tackle. Given Hurrell knocked Luetele around like a pinball on the incident he did get a ban for, it can hardly be described as forceful, and Hurrell himself drops to his knees which is the RFL/ NRL recommended action in those situations.

Honestly if that’s the best Leigh fans have to compare to Assiatas NFL linebacker technique I can only assume there’s either a group delusion over what Asiata does or they’re all on a collective windup playing dumb.

[phiggins]

57 minutes ago, Magic Superbeetle said:

Getting a bit desperate there to see things that aren’t there. The knee joint is bending the correct way in a controlled and structured tackle. Given Hurrell knocked Luetele around like a pinball on the incident he did get a ban for, it can hardly be described as forceful, and Hurrell himself drops to his knees which is the RFL/ NRL recommended action in those situations.

Honestly if that’s the best Leigh fans have to compare to Assiatas NFL linebacker technique I can only assume there’s either a group delusion over what Asiata does or they’re all on a collective windup playing dumb.

Luckily for the Saints players, you don’t represent them at any disciplinary hearings. “But he knocked Leutele around like a pinball your honour”

[JohnM]

We need much more transparency so that some fans can expose the errors, bias and plain incompetence of the MRP. After all, what do the members of the MRP know about the rules, about reviewing the evidence in a calm and considered way, and about reaching decisions based on fact not club and player loyalties or  antagonism. Much more reliance should be placed on fans interpretation of single-frame screenshots taken from videos shot from favourable or unfavourable angles.

[Phil]

24 minutes ago, JohnM said:

We need much more transparency so that some fans can expose the errors, bias and plain incompetence of the MRP. After all, what do the members of the MRP know about the rules, about reviewing the evidence in a calm and considered way, and about reaching decisions based on fact not club and player loyalties or  antagonism. Much more reliance should be placed on fans interpretation of single-frame screenshots taken from videos shot from favourable or unfavourable angles.

Oh for god’s sake stop it, you’re just being deliberately sensible now 

[Click]

10 hours ago, phiggins said:

Looks like Hurrell is lucky to only get one charge. This looks like a good old fashioned cannonball tackle. 

 

That doesn't look like a cannonball tackle, the first contact looks like it was on the lower back and then it gets awkward due to the twisting and wrestling in the tackle.

[phiggins]

1 minute ago, Click said:

That doesn't look like a cannonball tackle, the first contact looks like it was on the lower back and then it gets awkward due to the twisting and wrestling in the tackle.

I don't think contact is with the lower back at all, I think it's below the waist, maybe even knee height. Would need other angles to tell for sure. Of course, different people see tackles in different ways, we saw that with the Asiata tackle in the first minute.

I personally think that tackle looks borderline, he seems to fall into contact, and slightly to the side. I think he's lucky not to get a charge, and warranted at least a caution, as he is a bit of a bull in a china shop.

[Click]

2 hours ago, phiggins said:

I don't think contact is with the lower back at all, I think it's below the waist, maybe even knee height. Would need other angles to tell for sure. Of course, different people see tackles in different ways, we saw that with the Asiata tackle in the first minute.

I personally think that tackle looks borderline, he seems to fall into contact, and slightly to the side. I think he's lucky not to get a charge, and warranted at least a caution, as he is a bit of a bull in a china shop.

I personally can't understand Asiata not getting a ban for what he did, and I can understand why Hurrell wasn't given a ban for the video you posted. More angles would always be beneficial though.

[LeytherRob]

3 hours ago, JohnM said:

We need much more transparency so that some fans can expose the errors, bias and plain incompetence of the MRP. After all, what do the members of the MRP know about the rules, about reviewing the evidence in a calm and considered way, and about reaching decisions based on fact not club and player loyalties or  antagonism. Much more reliance should be placed on fans interpretation of single-frame screenshots taken from videos shot from favourable or unfavourable angles.

I'm assuming this is an indirect refence to my post, albeit completely missing the point of everything I said in favour of an absurd straw man argument against a position no one has taken. 

 

[phiggins]

7 minutes ago, Click said:

I personally can't understand Asiata not getting a ban for what he did, and I can understand why Hurrell wasn't given a ban for the video you posted. More angles would always be beneficial though.

They must've seen it the same way as Tomkins, Carney and Wilkin did on the night. I do think he did something that gave the referee (and MRP) a decision to make, which wasn't a wise move. 

[LeytherRob]

8 minutes ago, Click said:

I personally can't understand Asiata not getting a ban for what he did, and I can understand why Hurrell wasn't given a ban for the video you posted. More angles would always be beneficial though.

Brian Carney did a pretty good job of explaining it in post match which even Jon Wilkin ended up agreeing with despite his initial fury. As part of the guidance on these types of tackles there were several factors given to all clubs at the start of the year

• Head in the correct position i.e. not in front of the tackler - In Friday's game Asiata's head was in the correct postion
• Initial point of contact on or below the knee - Asiata comes in just below the hip and slides down Mata'utia's leg 
• Eye's down/not looking at the defender - Asiata was eyes down in this tackle so definitely meets this criteria
• Defenders feet off the floor/diving into the tackle - Asiata had his foot on the floor at the point of impact 
• Attempt to wrap/shoulder charge - Asiata's right arm was outstretched in an attempt to wrap even if he wasn't successful in the wrap

So based on those, only one of the criteria was met which is why it would have any gained a grade A.

[JohnM]

6 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

I'm assuming this is an indirect refence to my post, albeit completely missing the point of everything I said in favour of an absurd straw man argument against a position no one has taken. 

 

No.

"The problem with making assumptions is that we believe they are the truth! We invent a whole story that’s only truth for us, but we believe it. One assumption leads to another assumption; we jump to conclusions, and we take our story very personally…We make assumptions, we believe we are right about our assumptions, and then we defend our assumptions…" Don Miguel Ruiz.

Edited March 5 by JohnM