Disciplinary at it again.

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Barry Badrinath said:

Going round in circles here lads

You new here?

[Barry Badrinath]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

You new here?

I'm worried the more you keep it going  eventually it's gonna become a leigh thread 

[Dave T]

49 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said:

I'm worried the more you keep it going  eventually it's gonna become a leigh thread 

Ah, you have been here before! 

[Harry Stottle]

14 hours ago, Barry Badrinath said:

I'm worried the more you keep it going  eventually it's gonna become a leigh thread 

No let them keep going, eventually they will vanish up their own backsides.

[Dunbar]

49 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

No let them keep going, eventually they will vanish up their own backsides.

Which would certainly result in a 5 match ban due to an unnatural body position and unnecessary forceful contact.

[Harry Stottle]

2 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Which would certainly result in a 5 match ban due to an unnatural body position and unnecessary forceful contact.

Happy that you can see the funny side of my remark, it was said in jest.

Anyway though, I thought you had put it to bed a couple of days ago?

[Dunbar]

56 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Happy that you can see the funny side of my remark, it was said in jest.

Anyway though, I thought you had put it to bed a couple of days ago?

Like Sean Connery as Bond in Never Say Never Again, I just couldn't resist one more go around.

Edited April 21 by Dunbar

[LeeF]

This weeks minutes

https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/MATCH REVIEW PANEL MINUTES 22 APR 2024.pdf

In an interesting & welcome change the explanation for the red card no ban is included this week

[Lowdesert]

36 minutes ago, LeeF said:

This weeks minutes

https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/MATCH REVIEW PANEL MINUTES 22 APR 2024.pdf

In an interesting & welcome change the explanation for the red card no ban is included this week

If the tackler lifts the ball carriers leg in the tackle,( when stationary), isn’t the Ref supposed to call held Lee?

[Dunbar]

56 minutes ago, LeeF said:

This weeks minutes

https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/MATCH REVIEW PANEL MINUTES 22 APR 2024.pdf

In an interesting & welcome change the explanation for the red card no ban is included this week

I don't mean to get into a long circular argument again but last week a player was banned for putting pressure on another player and yet here a player (and his team mates) is not charged for when the opponent is being tackled in the upper body by two of player’s team mate and is twisted round and lands on his neck and shoulder.

Why is this not applying pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player?

[LeeF]

45 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

If the tackler lifts the ball carriers leg in the tackle,( when stationary), isn’t the Ref supposed to call held Lee?

Yes and he clearly did call held in this instance based on the highlights on the BBC website

[LeeF]

25 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I don't mean to get into a long circular argument again but last week a player was banned for putting pressure on another player and yet here a player (and his team mates) is not charged for when the opponent is being tackled in the upper body by two of player’s team mate and is twisted round and lands on his neck and shoulder.

Why is this not applying pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player?

Good question. This is a very different incident though. The twisting seems ok until the third man joined the tackle. Whether they have decided it was just a complete accident I don’t know. Last week’s was reckless and very poor technique

The sending off imo seemed correct when I watched the highlights but the MRP must have decided that it’s also down to the other 2 players involved

[Dunbar]

5 minutes ago, LeeF said:

Good question. This is a very different incident though. The twisting seems ok until the third man joined the tackle. Whether they have decided it was just a complete accident I don’t know. Last week’s was reckless and very poor technique

The sending off imo seemed correct when I watched the highlights but the MRP must have decided that it’s also down to the other 2 players involved

Yes, I agree it is a different incident.  But I would argue that if last week's incident was reckless then executing a tackle that results in a player landing on his head / neck is also reckless.

[LeeF]

20 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Yes, I agree it is a different incident.  But I would argue that if last week's incident was reckless then executing a tackle that results in a player landing on his head / neck is also reckless.

There are 4 options. Accidental. Careless. Reckless. Play on. As I posted I think this week’s was a red card. The MRP clearly thought it was accidental for whatever reason. Either way it was a long way from last week’s incident imo

[Dunbar]

13 minutes ago, LeeF said:

There are 4 options. Accidental. Careless. Reckless. Play on. As I posted I think this week’s was a red card. The MRP clearly thought it was accidental for whatever reason. Either way it was a long way from last week’s incident imo

Well, I don't want to get caught up arguing with myself.

I agree that incidents can be accidental and I thought last week's was accidental.  But others argue that it was reckless and poor technique and so a foul as it ended up putting dangerous pressure on a player and causing injury.

Here, the panel have concluded that it is not worthy of a ban - however it was poor technique and did put dangerous pressure on the tackled player.

Maybe the difference is whether a player is injured or not, that was stressed as being at the heart of last week's case.  I don't particularly like that as I think the action should be the issue, not the outcome.

Edited April 22 by Dunbar

[LeeF]

1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

Well, I don't want to get caught up arguing with myself.

I agree that incidents can be accidental and I thought last week's was accidental.  But others argue that it was reckless and poor technique and so a foul as it ended up putting dangerous pressure on a player and causing injury.

Here, the panel have concluded that it is not worthy of a ban - however it was poor technique and did put dangerous pressure on the tackled player.

Maybe the difference is whether a player is injured or not, that was stressed as being at the heart of last week's case.  I don't particularly like that as I think the action should be the issue, not the outcome.

Maybe although an injury impacts the length of ban not whether there is a charge. I can honestly say I would have red carded this weeks incident hence why I am surprised at no charge. Now if only some journalist would ask some pertinent questions

[The Blues Ox]

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I don't mean to get into a long circular argument again but last week a player was banned for putting pressure on another player and yet here a player (and his team mates) is not charged for when the opponent is being tackled in the upper body by two of player’s team mate and is twisted round and lands on his neck and shoulder.

Why is this not applying pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player?

At a guess here but the RFL put out a new Tackle Safe video a few weeks back which encourages players to lift a leg of their opponents from juniors upwards which could clearly lead to pressure been placed on the mid-lower part of the standing leg of the attacker, they simply can't start banning people for a tackle that they are actively encouraging.

Im undecided if it is a tackling technique that we should be pushing especially at junior level and I feel it has a lot of potential to go wrong especially in less experienced junior players. I were part of a session recently where we were going through some of these techniques with players and had one where two players made contact and both then decided to grab a different leg. Obviously we were able to quickly call a halt at that point but if that happens in a game we could be increasing the risk of spine and nexk injuries in my opinion.

[Lowdesert]

7 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

At a guess here but the RFL put out a new Tackle Safe video a few weeks back which encourages players to lift a leg of their opponents from juniors upwards which could clearly lead to pressure been placed on the mid-lower part of the standing leg of the attacker, they simply can't start banning people for a tackle that they are actively encouraging.

Im undecided if it is a tackling technique that we should be pushing especially at junior level and I feel it has a lot of potential to go wrong especially in less experienced junior players. I were part of a session recently where we were going through some of these techniques with players and had one where two players made contact and both then decided to grab a different leg. Obviously we were able to quickly call a halt at that point but if that happens in a game we could be increasing the risk of spine and nexk injuries in my opinion.

There was a lot more to that video than just lifting a leg.  That was commented on to get the Ref to call ‘held’ and the tackle was complete.  Think you’ve picked one item to suit your gripe Oxy

[The Blues Ox]

18 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

There was a lot more to that video than just lifting a leg.  That was commented on to get the Ref to call ‘held’ and the tackle was complete.  Think you’ve picked one item to suit your gripe Oxy

Yes of course there is a lot more to that video than just one aspect but it was that part that was relevant to the discussion. Also I wouldn't say its a gripe, more a genuine concern about if we should be encouraging that sort of tackle technique due to the potential for injury.

Edit: Probably worth adding as well that yes a ref should be calling held with the defender on one leg but any coach worth his salt will be encouraging players to try and time taking the attacker to ground on or very close to the refs held call.

Edited April 22 by The Blues Ox

[Lowdesert]

16 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

Yes of course there is a lot more to that video than just one aspect but it was that part that was relevant to the discussion. Also I wouldn't say its a gripe, more a genuine concern about if we should be encouraging that sort of tackle technique due to the potential for injury.

Edit: Probably worth adding as well that yes a ref should be calling held with the defender on one leg but any coach worth his salt will be encouraging players to try and time taking the attacker to ground on or very close to the refs held call.

It’s been going on for so long.  Also, some Refs call it, some let it go.  I agree it’s a concern but it seems that the messages on safer tackling are getting out there.  Let’s hope those messages are demonstrated more by the Pro’s.

 

[LeeF]

58 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

It’s been going on for so long.  Also, some Refs call it, some let it go.  I agree it’s a concern but it seems that the messages on safer tackling are getting out there.  Let’s hope those messages are demonstrated more by the Pro’s.

 

I know the referees societies will be working hard to share that information via training sessions etc but at an amateur level you are dependant upon referees attending meetings especially those who are more set in their ways

[Lowdesert]

1 minute ago, LeeF said:

I know the referees societies will be working hard to share that information via training sessions etc but at an amateur level you are dependant upon referees attending meetings especially those who are more set in their ways

That and the travel.