John Asiata completely vindicated on appeal.

[Harry Stottle]

Following the game at St Helen's were he was dismissed from the field after 30 odd seconds, so in such a tight game the call from the referee Liam Moore could well have had a bearing on the result as he has been deemed to have got that decision wrong by the judiciary panel.

Another point from that incident was the goggle eyed vociferous rant by Jon Wilkin very much Paul Wellenesq against the same player last season for a couple of incidents by the same player who again was totally vindicated for his actions, I believe Paul Wellens received a fine for his outburst, so what about Wilkins even after having the 'rulings' explained live on air by Brian Carney to tell him Asiata did nothing wrong still went on with his 'Character Assasination' towards Asiata, this is not the first time that Wilkin has been at the centre of delivering very controversial comments, surely the RFL should be making a formal complaint re this mans conduct to Sky to get him removed.

 

 

[sweaty craiq]

I believe Wilkins called him a clown - I would gladly contribute to legal proceedings for the sheeite he has had to put up with and character assassination that followed. 

[phiggins]

Oddly enough, there was part of Wilkin's rant that I agreed with (of a fashion). While the challenge itself was ultimately cleared, he gave the referee a decision to make, and Saints players something to stoke up some anger about. And it had us a man down for 10 minutes in a close game.

It will happen again, unless he can complete the tackle with his arms actually wrapped around the attacker's legs.

[sweaty craiq]

10 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Oddly enough, there was part of Wilkin's rant that I agreed with (of a fashion). While the challenge itself was ultimately cleared, he gave the referee a decision to make, and Saints players something to stoke up some anger about. And it had us a man down for 10 minutes in a close game.

It will happen again, unless he can complete the tackle with his arms actually wrapped around the attacker's legs.

You will see many tackles in most games whereby the defender fails tp wrap his arms aroung the attacker - if the answer is for the attacking team to run in to get the defender dismissed then we will be in for some interesting games, plus you have just outlawed the ankle tap 

[Damien]

9 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Oddly enough, there was part of Wilkin's rant that I agreed with (of a fashion). While the challenge itself was ultimately cleared, he gave the referee a decision to make, and Saints players something to stoke up some anger about. And it had us a man down for 10 minutes in a close game.

It will happen again, unless he can complete the tackle with his arms actually wrapped around the attacker's legs.

That's an nice, well rounded and balanced post.

Asiata may have got off this time but he has been banned previously and is very likely to be banned again in the future unless he tidies up his technique.

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, sweaty craiq said:

I would gladly contribute to legal proceedings

Go on then

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

That's an nice, well rounded and balanced post.

Asiata may have got off this time but he has been banned previously and is very likely to be banned again in the future unless he tidies up his technique.

When was he banned previously over here I cannot recall it curious to be corrected? And I assume you are talking about the same kind of incident, come up with the evidence of him getting game penalty notices for tackling around the legs or I will assume you are just making it up.

Edited March 28 by Harry Stottle

[phiggins]

1 hour ago, sweaty craiq said:

You will see many tackles in most games whereby the defender fails tp wrap his arms aroung the attacker - if the answer is for the attacking team to run in to get the defender dismissed then we will be in for some interesting games, plus you have just outlawed the ankle tap 

Rightly or wrongly, there is going to be an increased scrutiny when Asiata tackles low. And when he comes back from injury, if he makes the exact same tackle again he runs the risk of being sin binned. The charge might be challenged, but that's no good to us on matchday. If his right arm doesn't drop so quickly, then it becomes more apparent where his initial contact point is, and there is less question over the intention to wrap. Then if opposition players run in, we get the penalty, just like at the start of the cup final last year.

As a Leigh fan, I'm glad they have appealed the charge, and highlighted that it was a card given based on the player involved rather than the actual incident. But I'm more bothered about seeing us win games, rather than proving the point. And what would be a small tweak to the tackle would reduce the risk of him being sent from the field considerably.

[Harry Stottle]

9 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Rightly or wrongly, there is going to be an increased scrutiny when Asiata tackles low. And when he comes back from injury, if he makes the exact same tackle again he runs the risk of being sin binned. The charge might be challenged, but that's no good to us on matchday. If his right arm doesn't drop so quickly, then it becomes more apparent where his initial contact point is, and there is less question over the intention to wrap. Then if opposition players run in, we get the penalty, just like at the start of the cup final last year.

As a Leigh fan, I'm glad they have appealed the charge, and highlighted that it was a card given based on the player involved rather than the actual incident. But I'm more bothered about seeing us win games, rather than proving the point. And what would be a small tweak to the tackle would reduce the risk of him being sent from the field considerably.

Usually I agree with most you say Higgy but not this time, like many on these pages - *who are silent now, and the many Saints fans in the ground no doubt fuelled by Wellens last year - you to seem to be proving Asiata guilty before he has done anything.

* there are 8 replies of 190 views.

Edited March 28 by Harry Stottle

[phiggins]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

Usually I agree with most you say Higgy but not this time, like many on these pages - who are silent now, and the many Saints fans in the ground no doubt fuelled by Wellens last year - you to seem to be providing Asiata guilty before he has done anything.

No, I'm not judging the tackle. I think the tackle itself was just about fine, as did the pundits and tribunal. But the reality is, he runs the risk of being sin binned if he makes the exact same tackle again in his first game back. I'm not saying it's right, but it is the way it is. I'd rather see him go slightly higher, or keep his arms in the tackle for slightly longer, and stay on the pitch.

[Dave T]

I think some fans need to be careful before celebrating a victory here. We have seen Saints win certain appeals which may be a victory on technical grounds but reasonable people don't agree with them. 

These are unorthodox tackles, genuinely nobody else in SL seems to be tackling regularly like this, they are often reckless and whilst he may win the odd case because of a disagreement about point of contact being a few centimetres here and there, these are risky tackles. 

I think phiggins is right, the focus here should be about him improving his tackle technique rather than celebrating techonal 'wins'. 

[Whippet13]

8 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Usually I agree with most you say Higgy but not this time, like many on these pages - *who are silent now, and the many Saints fans in the ground no doubt fuelled by Wellens last year - you to seem to be proving Asiata guilty before he has done anything.

* there are 8 replies of 190 views.

Bear in mind these aren't unique views.

[Damien]

8 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think some fans need to be careful before celebrating a victory here. We have seen Saints win certain appeals which may be a victory on technical grounds but reasonable people don't agree with them. 

These are unorthodox tackles, genuinely nobody else in SL seems to be tackling regularly like this, they are often reckless and whilst he may win the odd case because of a disagreement about point of contact being a few centimetres here and there, these are risky tackles. 

I think phiggins is right, the focus here should be about him improving his tackle technique rather than celebrating techonal 'wins'. 

It is rather weird to start a thread like this. Almost every week we have a general disciplinary thread where this kind of stuff is covered yet for some bizarre reason we have a thread like this celebrating someone getting off.

As you say Phiggins is absolutely correct, there is an obvious problem that will be costly to Leigh if not rectified. It's head in the sand stuff to ignore that.

Edited March 28 by Damien

[Exiled Wiganer]

If Lam doesn’t tell him that - however fair or unfair it is - his technique is under close scrutiny, then he isn’t doing his job. 

[RigbyLuger]

Would have been nicer for Leigh's statement on Zak Hardaker's off-field "issues" to have been as wordy as the one on this.

[sam4731]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

Go on then

Wouldn't it just so RL for the debate around a potential RL development fund end on getting Jon Wilkin imprisoned rather than helping a community club?

[meast]

The irony of Leigh fans complaining about "character assassination" and the veiled victimisation of one of their players.

How's Zak these days? 

Oh and the bottle chucking staff member or ranting, drunk, owner in overalls?

Classy club

[meast]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

When was he banned previously over here I cannot recall it curious to be corrected? And I assume you are talking about the same kind of incident, come up with the evidence of him getting game penalty notices for tackling around the legs or I will assume you are just making it up.

His technique has potential, more than most tackling techniques, to cause serious injury not just to his opponent but to himself.

It's reckless and dangerous, whether it's classed as legal or not.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I think some fans need to be careful before celebrating a victory here. We have seen Saints win certain appeals which may be a victory on technical grounds but reasonable people don't agree with them. 

These are unorthodox tackles, genuinely nobody else in SL seems to be tackling regularly like this, they are often reckless and whilst he may win the odd case because of a disagreement about point of contact being a few centimetres here and there, these are risky tackles. 

I think phiggins is right, the focus here should be about him improving his tackle technique rather than celebrating techonal 'wins'. 

Mr Asiata states he has been playing the sport since he was 8 years old and this 'technique' has always been in his armoury, no bans at all as far as I know ever in Australia as a junior, intermediate, and first grade, nor any bans over here.

The tackle on Passi assisted by a team mate coming from the opposite direction to the torso was also very revelent, should he have also been cited by not realising he may cause an injury by joining in? That tackle must go down as one of the best try saving tackles of all time, to be congratulated not derided.

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Usually I agree with most you say Higgy but not this time, like many on these pages - *who are silent now, and the many Saints fans in the ground no doubt fuelled by Wellens last year - you to seem to be proving Asiata guilty before he has done anything.

* there are 8 replies of 190 views.

Maybe the rest of us viewed it and dismissed it as yet another pointless  whine from the sports professional victim club.

Edited March 28 by JohnM

[JohnM]

6 minutes ago, meast said:

The irony of Leigh fans complaining about "character assassination" and the veiled victimisation of one of their players.

How's Zak these days? 

Oh and the bottle chucking staff member or ranting, drunk, owner in overalls?

Classy club

Spot on. 

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

It is rather weird to start a thread like this. Almost every week we have a general disciplinary thread where this kind of stuff is covered yet for some bizarre reason we have a thread like this celebrating someone getting off.

As you say Phiggins is absolutely correct, there is an obvious problem that will be costly to Leigh if not rectified. It's head in the sand stuff to ignore that.

Have you found the evidence yet, where you state he has been banned previously for this type of tackle? Or do we take your statement as complete fabrication?

What is weird, it wasn't just that he got off - quite rightly, there was no other decision to give - it was about Wilkin and his comments live on TV.

[Harry Stottle]

9 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Maybe the rest of us viewed it and dismissed it as yet another pointless  whine from the sports professional victim club.

Sad man.

[JohnM]

Your admission is welcome. Shouldn't you be at work, though?

[Dave T]

13 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Mr Asiata states he has been playing the sport since he was 8 years old and this 'technique' has always been in his armoury, no bans at all as far as I know ever in Australia as a junior, intermediate, and first grade, nor any bans over here.

The tackle on Passi assisted by a team mate coming from the opposite direction to the torso was also very revelent, should he have also been cited by not realising he may cause an injury by joining in? That tackle must go down as one of the best try saving tackles of all time, to be congratulated not derided.

Plenty of tackles that players were doing at aged 8 are now banned.