Fri 8th Mar: SL: Leigh Leopards v Leeds Rhinos KO 20:00 (Sky)

[dkw]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

Quote you

"Yet all of a sudden when the refs have obviously pulled it back now under instruction'

That does not imply an opinion, does it?

Of course it bloody does, it's exactly what that implys.

[LeeF]

17 minutes ago, dkw said:

How exactly is me having an opinion a lie? 

Because it’s not the correct opinion

[Chrispmartha]

16 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Have they or was this Mr Kendalls deliberation, still awaiting confirmation on the rules being more lenient as is being claimed.

Why would he have to confirm anything to you? 
 

I’m not sure what you’re suggesting here to be honest, there has been far freer cards produced since round one, it’s not just Leigh that have been hard done to so to speak.

[RigbyLuger]

33 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Happens every time new protocols are brought in, It was always going to settle down after a few games.

Rohan Smith’s presser is interesting, he’s basically saying that it’s created a situation where players, fans and coaches are now concentrating too much on wether it is or isn’t a card, i agree, you see far more players complaining to the ref, fans screaming for cards after every tackle etc.

How many games have we all been to where fans scream for cards? That piece of commentary from Mick Morgan, which is lauded for all the wrong reasons, is exactly that!

[Dave T]

56 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Have they or was this Mr Kendalls deliberation, still awaiting confirmation on the rules being more lenient as is being claimed.

Tbh, it looks like they've softened quite substantially week by week. 

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

Happens every time new protocols are brought in, It was always going to settle down after a few games.

Rohan Smith’s presser is interesting, he’s basically saying that it’s created a situation where players, fans and coaches are now concentrating too much on wether it is or isn’t a card, i agree, you see far more players complaining to the ref, fans screaming for cards after every tackle etc.

I think a natural bedding in period would see errors reduced, but there has absolutely been a softening of things that weren't errors, they were just stricter, which is how we are meant to be going. 

In a few recent games I've genuinely seen no difference from last year. Which isn't necessarily an issue, but it's not what we are told is meant to happen. 

[Dunbar]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

?. Lost me what do you mean.

I mean that you are the person that typed this during the Wigan Penrith match "you won't be watching Rugby League as we know it, it will be some kind of plastic sanitised version, hand on heart... what is the better rules to watch what we have witnessed in the last two weeks or this tonight?"

And yet now you are complaining that Leeds players didn't get carded.  It is raging hypocrisy.

[phiggins]

3 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I mean that you are the person that typed this during the Wigan Penrith match "you won't be watching Rugby League as we know it, it will be some kind of plastic sanitised version, hand on heart... what is the better rules to watch what we have witnessed in the last two weeks or this tonight?"

And yet now you are complaining that Leeds players didn't get carded.  It is raging hypocrisy.

It’s not hypocrisy to think that referees haven’t officiated to the new rules, even if you don’t agree with those rules 

[glossop saint]

For me then the goalposts are being moved during this thread, rather cleverly by some posters I think. I've not seen the game or incidents so can't comment on them however for me the issue is the tweet (X?) not the refereeing decisions. Whether they are right or wrong that shouldn't give a club owner permission to make the comments that he has made. What overhaul is he suggesting for the game?

After last year I think that he and the club were slowly starting to win round some doubters however this sort of behaviour is embarrassing. Someone earlier posted about that losing tends to reveal your true colours and we might be in for a taste of it this season from senior figures within the Leigh club. It was unacceptable when other owners (including McManus) have made comments in the past and it is now. What's next? Calling out Robert Hicks for a charity MMA fight?

[Harry Stottle]

7 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I mean that you are the person that typed this during the Wigan Penrith match "you won't be watching Rugby League as we know it, it will be some kind of plastic sanitised version, hand on heart... what is the better rules to watch what we have witnessed in the last two weeks or this tonight?"

And yet now you are complaining that Leeds players didn't get carded.  It is raging hypocrisy.

Yes and I am still of that opinion, but don't you lot who condoned the cards and sending offs call me a hypocrite when you are now condoning the actions that you said no demanded needed stamping out and removing from the game.

You have more faces than the town hall clock.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, glossop saint said:

For me then the goalposts are being moved during this thread, rather cleverly by some posters I think. I've not seen the game or incidents so can't comment on them however for me the issue is the tweet (X?) not the refereeing decisions. Whether they are right or wrong that shouldn't give a club owner permission to make the comments that he has made. What overhaul is he suggesting for the game?

After last year I think that he and the club were slowly starting to win round some doubters however this sort of behaviour is embarrassing. Someone earlier posted about that losing tends to reveal your true colours and we might be in for a taste of it this season from senior figures within the Leigh club. It was unacceptable when other owners (including McManus) have made comments in the past and it is now. What's next? Calling out Robert Hicks for a charity MMA fight?

I think this is right, irrespective of decisions, refereeing approach etc. I didn't see anywhere near enough for Leigh to feel hard done to, and DB really should be charged for bringing the game into disrepute. 

The problem is that he is just a loudmouth drunk, and a sore loser. None of the things we are discussing here on the match thread excuses his alcohol-fuelled rants. 

[phiggins]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I think this is right, irrespective of decisions, refereeing approach etc. I didn't see anywhere near enough for Leigh to feel hard done to, and DB really should be charged for bringing the game into disrepute. 

The problem is that he is just a loudmouth drunk, and a sore loser. None of the things we are discussing here on the match thread excuses his alcohol-fuelled rants. 

But given how it is worded, what are you charging him for? He’s not accused anyone of anything and said he’ll be noisy in the next council meeting. As stupid a post it is, I don’t see how you can bring charges for it

[JohnM]

I thought Leigh were impressive last night, the results of hard work by Beaumont and his team. To hold out for so long against a top team like Leeds is no mean feat.

By that stupid tweet, we maybe see the real Beaumont. He's doing a disservice to his own club and team. All's been well so far for them this season, aided by Beaumont keeping his mouth shut. He's ruined all that.

[Dunbar]

11 minutes ago, phiggins said:

It’s not hypocrisy to think that referees haven’t officiated to the new rules, even if you don’t agree with those rules 

Far from it.  It is obvious to anyone and everyone that the referee's have relaxed their approach to cards for head contact in the last round of games.

And that has happened due to the collective response of players, fans and coaches saying it is ruining the game.  And now, when a fan doesn't see yellow cards for the opposition for high tackles, he is complaining.  That is hypocrisy.

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, phiggins said:

But given how it is worded, what are you charging him for? He’s not accused anyone of anything and said he’ll be noisy in the next council meeting. As stupid a post it is, I don’t see how you can bring charges for it

Bringing the game into disrepute is helpfully vague for things like this. 

I think it covers trashing your own comp. Maybe they could ask him to clarify his comments. 

[Dunbar]

6 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes and I am still of that opinion, but don't you lot who condoned the cards and sending offs call me a hypocrite when you are now condoning the actions that you said no demanded needed stamping out and removing from the game.

You have more faces than the town hall clock.

Where have I condoned head high tackles?

[Harry Stottle]

3 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Far from it.  It is obvious to anyone and everyone that the referee's have relaxed their approach to cards for head contact in the last round of games.

So with your previous comments before this round of games you must be very disappointed that the rules have been relaxed.

[Chrispmartha]

8 minutes ago, phiggins said:

But given how it is worded, what are you charging him for? He’s not accused anyone of anything and said he’ll be noisy in the next council meeting. As stupid a post it is, I don’t see how you can bring charges for it

Bad spelling 

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Far from it.  It is obvious to anyone and everyone that the referee's have relaxed their approach to cards for head contact in the last round of games.

And that has happened due to the collective response of players, fans and coaches saying it is ruining the game.  And now, when a fan doesn't see yellow cards for the opposition for high tackles, he is complaining.  That is hypocrisy.

Nah. Had the RFL come out and clarified that they are now abandoning it and Harry complains, your point would be spot on.

Fans are not being hypocrites being utterly baffled by the RFL's actions in this space. 

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

So with your previous comments before this round of games you must be very disappointed that the rules have been relaxed.

I think you are getting confused here Harry, you keep using the word condoned, what people were saying is that if head high tackles are automatically cards then so be it and the game isn’t ‘gone’. However it’s obvious that has been relaxed, you can be ok with both those positions. But you were against those interpretations but now seem annoyed they have been relaxed.

[Harry Stottle]

2 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I think you are getting confused here Harry, you keep using the word condoned, what people were saying is that if head high tackles are automatically cards then so be it and the game isn’t ‘gone’. However it’s obvious that has been relaxed, you can be ok with both those positions. But you were against those interpretations but now seem annoyed they have been relaxed.

Yes I was against how harsh actions were deemed to be by the officials,   ut I was shouted down by those who said they were nessacary, so what now?

[Dunbar]

6 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

So with your previous comments before this round of games you must be very disappointed that the rules have been relaxed.

I wouldn't say disappointed is the right word.  I recognise the motive behind the changes that the RFL are essentially being forced into - by the wider increased awareness of the effects of repetitive head injury in sport and the specific legal challenges of our sport - and I think it is unfortunate that the whole sport cannot be united in trying to address this without people saying the game is being ruined.

But I am happy enough if high tackles are penalties and just the more serious foul play is met with a card.

[Chrispmartha]

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes I was against how harsh actions were deemed to be by the officials,   ut I was shouted down by those who said they were nessacary, so what now?

You should be happy that they have been relaxed a bit?

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

I wouldn't say disappointed is the right word.  I recognise the motive behind the changes that the RFL are essentially being forced into - by the wider increased awareness of the effects of repetitive head injury in sport and the specific legal challenges of our sport - and I think it is unfortunate that the whole sport cannot be united in trying to address this without people saying the game is being ruined.

But I am happy enough if high tackles are penalties and just the more serious foul play is met with a card.

I do think that's a good politicians answer Dunbar

I'll be blunt, I'm not happy that they've seemingly bottled it. The reasons we had the clamp down haven't gone away. Apart from the Hull FC issue, there hasn't been much that has been wrong, we've clamped down, that's led to more cards, as it should. 

We've now abandoned it, your last line, which now looks to be the approach is just the same as last year. 

There is the added issue that nothing has been communicated. Fans shouldn't have to contend with hidden narratives changing every week. 

Union have been light years ahead of us on this topic, and I do think for future legal cases there is a risk of that being used against us. 

But, that is probably all a debate for a separate thread, rather than a Leigh v Leeds match thread where Leigh lost for Rugby reasons (not being good enough for the last 30).

[super major]

In the first 2 rounds there were offences that were punished a little excessively and one totally ridiculously. After that furore there was a move back to last seasons interpretation. Personally I think they may have moved a little too far too soon but it remains a fact that it has been inconsistently applied. Perhaps they are leaving more decisions to the MRP instead of stopping play for the video ref to have countless replays?