Jump to content

Disciplinary at it again.

Loiner
 Share

Recommended Posts

Dunbar

Dunbar

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Yeah, looks a strange one. One thing that maybe looks odd is the tacklers knee goes into Isa, but not sure if that's me looking for something rather than being a real offence. 

I think we could find something like this many times in a game.

Isa suffered a serious injury and that is awful but I personally believe that they are punishing the outcome here, not the action.

  • Like 3

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 271
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Dunbar
Dunbar

The Dupree one is a poor decision from the panel for me.  They say he is 'bracing for contact' but that contact was an elbow direct to the tackler and I thought it was very dangerous. If a tackle

Loiner
Loiner

Cam Smith gets a one match ban for a innocuous nudge on Cas player, Sangare a one match ban for an accidental head clash but Dupree gets away with elbow into matty Lees face. Unbelievable.

phiggins
phiggins

Really struggling with the Dupree one. So it's ok to raise a forearm / elbow with the arm not carrying the ball, and hit a defender with it, just as long as you don't hit him in the head? It's as

Posted Images

Dave T

Dave T

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

The charge detail says "Dangerous Contact - Defender uses any part of their body forcefully to twist, bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player."

I just cannot see this as there is no attempt to bend, twist or apply pressure that would cause any risk.

The descriptions are useless, but I think using a knee to apply pressure on the players leg could be covered by that. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave T

Dave T

Posted
Posted
Just now, Dunbar said:

I think we could find something like this many times in a game.

Isa suffered a serious injury and that is awful but I personally believe that they are punishing the outcome here, not the action.

Yeah, I'm not sure tbh. Like I say, I thought it looked weird (without hearing any commentary of the tackle) so I'm not sure it is an orthodox tackle, but it'd be interesting to see other cases of this type of tackle, because I'm not sure whether it was bad or not! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EagleEyePie

EagleEyePie

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

The charge detail says "Dangerous Contact - Defender uses any part of their body forcefully to twist, bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player."

I just cannot see this as there is no attempt to bend, twist or apply pressure that would cause any risk.

I agree with the last sentence in the sense that I don't think there's an attempt to do that, but I think it's pretty clear he's applied pressure with his knee in making that tackle. It's a bit reckless and out of control for his knee to be contacting the defender like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunbar

Dunbar

Posted
Posted
Just now, EagleEyePie said:

I agree with the last sentence in the sense that I don't think there's an attempt to do that, but I think it's pretty clear he's applied pressure with his knee in making that tackle. It's a bit reckless and out of control for his knee to be contacting the defender like that. 

Do you think of there was no injury this tackle would have recieved attention from the committee, and if so a ban issued?

  • Like 1

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I just cannot see this as there is no attempt to bend, twist or apply pressure that would cause any risk.

Eh?

Using his knee in contact to apply pressure against Isa's ankle, forcing it in an unnatural plane, has clearly caused risk and a serious injury outcome.

The tackler had no right having his legs anywhere near contact with Isa, a virtually stationary target.

I wouldn't argue that he deliberately meant to cause the damage, but being "accidental", is in no way a mitigation for getting your tackle contact right.

Edited by dboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, HullWire said:

Looks accidental that his knee lands on the ankle to me. Possibly a ban but not that length.

I don't think the charge is due to the injury (it's due to the offence), but it does look like the length of the ban IS.

That is problematic.

Edited by dboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EagleEyePie

EagleEyePie

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, dboy said:

I don't think the charge is due to the injury, but it does look like length of the ban IS.

That is problematic.

That's always been the case. Injury is an aggravating factor. It's no different to if you punched someone in the face and they sustained no injury vs punching someone in the face and them suffering a broken jaw. The latter is a more serious offence even if the action in the first scenario is the same as in the second.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EagleEyePie

EagleEyePie

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Do you think of there was no injury this tackle would have recieved attention from the committee, and if so a ban issued?

We've seen lots of seemingly innocuous incidents picked up by the disciplinary panel so I think it would. Whether it would receive a ban I don't know as I don't know how much causing an injury affects the grading and range of suspension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunbar

Dunbar

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, EagleEyePie said:

We've seen lots of seemingly innocuous incidents picked up by the disciplinary panel so I think it would. Whether it would receive a ban I don't know as I don't know how much causing an injury affects the grading and range of suspension.

Well, it is all theoretical but my opinion is that if Isa got up and played the ball, that tackle would have gone completely unnoticed along with almost all the others in the match. 

Edited by Dunbar
  • Like 2

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WN83

WN83

Posted
Posted

It’s always dodgy ground giving out big bans based on injury. I didn’t see anything in it live and it just looks a clumsy on review, with no malicious intent. I made a point on here a couple of weeks ago asking why huge bans are also being backed up with big fines. I can’t see that Namo will be on a fortune and is now not only sat down for 5 games but is financially hit. I can see the need for a ban but it all feels a little ott. It’s a sad situation for Willie Isa but I don’t think Namo being hammered will make him feel any better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave T

Dave T

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Well, it is all theoretical but my opinion is that if Isa got up and played the ball, that tackled would have gone completely unnoticed along with almost all the others in the match. 

I don't 100% disagree, but we do see plenty of instances where that is the case and band are still dished out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted

6.3.1.4. Injury caused

- If the Misconduct has caused injury to an opponent, this may result in a higher penalty than if no injury had occurred.

- The Operational Rules Tribunal may consider the length of time an injured opponent is likely to be out of the game when passing sentence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunbar

Dunbar

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I don't 100% disagree, but we do see plenty of instances where that is the case and band are still dished out. 

True, but they usually fall into a category we know that the disciplinary panel/ref's are looking for... a late tackle, a high shot, a tackle on the kicker.

I would ask anyone to answer this - if you were watching that game and saw that tackle and Isa got up and played the ball and the game carried on, would you recognise any foul play?

  • Like 1

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunbar

Dunbar

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, dboy said:

I wouldn't argue that he deliberately meant to cause the damage, but being "accidental", is in no way a mitigation for getting your tackle contact right.

Really, you don't think there is any place for accidents in a high speed full contact sport like Rugby League?

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

True, but they usually fall into a category we know that the disciplinary panel/ref's are looking for... a late tackle, a high shot, a tackle on the kicker.

I would ask anyone to answer this - if you were watching that game and saw that tackle and Isa got up and played the ball and the game carried on, would you recognise any foul play?

You mean in a scenario where Namo doesn't make contact with Isa's ankle and break it?

No, because it wouldn't have a foul.

Edited by dboy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said:

Nope, I would have thought the applying pressure law was about bending and twisting a joint.

 

That's just a freak accident for me.

But then you'd be wrong to think that. It includes direct contact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Really, you don't think there is any place for accidents in a high speed full contact sport like Rugby League?

Of course accidents happen, but it's not an excuse.

I'm certain the Cas representatives made a full mitigation plea, including "accident" and "no intent".

Namo's legs shouldn't have been anywhere near contact though, though the length of the ban is clearly linked to the injury outcome.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunbar

Dunbar

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, dboy said:

You mean in a scenario where Namo doesn't make contact with Isa's ankle an break it?

No, because it wouldn't have a foul.

It may be me, but I can't really work out what you mean in this post.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Really, you don't think there is any place for accidents in a high speed full contact sport like Rugby League?

I really should have put "excuse", rather than "mitigation".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dunbar

Dunbar

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, dboy said:

Of course accidents happen, but it's not an excuse.

I'm certain the Cas representatives made a full mitigation plea, including "accident" and "no intent".

Namo's legs shouldn't have been anywhere near contact though, though the length of the ban is clearly linked to the injury outcome.

 

I will take a look in the next live game I watch to see how many players legs make contact with the opposition when they effect a tackle.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted
Just now, Dunbar said:

It may be me, but I can't really work out what you mean in this post.

If that tackle occurred, but Isa got up and played on...where is the foul???

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted
Just now, Dunbar said:

I will take a look in the next live game I watch to see how many players legs make contact with the opposition when they effect a tackle.

Just make sure you aren't comparing apples with pears...look for the factors.

Player runs in at a stationary, vulnerable ball carrier and leads into contact with his knee, not his upper body/shoulder.

He contacts a joint directly, with force, putting it in an unnatural position, causing serious injury.

Those are the factors that = a charge and lengthy ban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.