Sat 10th Aug: SL: Leeds Rhinos v Wigan Warriors KO 15:00 (Sky)

[JohnM]

16 hours ago, north yorks trinity said:

I think you'll find he's already been found guilty. There's obviously the (remote, IMO having seen the footage) possibility of the guilty verdict being subsequently overturned but as things stand he is officially guilty. Who has suggested burning at the stake? Only seen suggestions of a long ban which (again, only my opinion) is rather more lenient. 

He was sent off.  Now its all-pile-on from the TRL court.

[Fevrover]

On 10/08/2024 at 18:45, bromleybulldog said:

I can't see anything controversial about the sending off and probable 3 or 4 match ban.

Dec Patten at Fev got 6 for less then what Smith did.

[Lowdesert]

6 hours ago, Fevrover said:

Dec Patten at Fev got 6 for less then what Smith did.

Grade E is 3 - 5 matches.  Patton got Grade F.  Both appear to be under the same Law 15.1, so maybe past history did for Patton? I didn’t see Pattons effort but thought Smiths was intentional as it gets.  
 

 

[LeeF]

https://www.rugby-league.com/governance/rules-and-regulations/disciplinary/disciplinary-case?case=18723

on a first read the Patton incident is very different to the Smith one albeit covered by the same Law

[Loiner]

17 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

You laughed when I said you'd win!!!

I did indeed, I wish they had played like that all season, I fear its too little too late now.

[Loiner]

On 10/08/2024 at 18:36, JohnM said:

I didn't see the incident. I was distracted by the final of the Olympic underwater horseback karaoke break-dancing marathon. Given Bentley's track record, it's just possible that he may have had some part in the incident. Can any impartial observer on here (go one, there must be ONE) comment?

I can honestly say John,James Bentley did nothing wrong at all. Smith was getting frustrated all game but to do that two or three minutes from time is the action of an idiot, a dirty one at that.

[Loiner]

On 10/08/2024 at 18:44, JohnM said:

Perhaps Bentley got his retaliation in first.  Anyway, whatever sanction Smith gets will be controversial.

Nothing controversial he deserves 4/5 matches.

[JohnM]

Any more bids? It's going up each time I look.

 

Edited August 12 by JohnM

[Lowdesert]

2 hours ago, LeeF said:

https://www.rugby-league.com/governance/rules-and-regulations/disciplinary/disciplinary-case?case=18723

on a first read the Patton incident is very different to the Smith one albeit covered by the same Law

Indeed no 2 incidents are the same but it appears that both have been assessed as coming under 15.1.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

1 hour ago, Loiner said:

I did indeed, I wish they had played like that all season, I fear its too little too late now.

They might well win every game knowing Leeds' end of season history! 

To be honest I only really thought they'd win because Wigan would be battered and tired....I still think that's part of it though Rhinos played superbly in defence and attack ...a joy to watch actually 

[LeeF]

47 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

Indeed no 2 incidents are the same but it appears that both have been assessed as coming under 15.1.

Yes as the law is, quite correctly, broad. The individual offences are more detailed hence the E/F difference to the 2 incidents. 
 

I did laugh at Patton claiming his should only be Grade C though

[JohnM]

Smith Grade E 3 to 5 I think.

[DoubleD]

3 hours ago, JohnM said:

Any more bids? It's going up each time I look.

 

5 games minimum 

[JohnM]

Not sold. Below reserve, I'm afraid.

Edited August 12 by JohnM

[DoubleD]

9 hours ago, JohnM said:

Not sold. Below reserve, I'm afraid.

What do you deem appropriate for a deliberate forearm smash to the face, with force, from height? 

It could easily have broken his jaw/cheekbone/eye socket and against a person who has a history of concussions.

In the current age, where knowledge of damage from head knocks is so much greater, anything less than 5 games sends a bad signal from the authorities, regardless of your team allegiances. 

Tbh I would advocate for 8 games 

[Lowdesert]

13 hours ago, LeeF said:

Yes as the law is, quite correctly, broad. The individual offences are more detailed hence the E/F difference to the 2 incidents. 
 

I did laugh at Patton claiming his should only be Grade C though

That is the norm in many situations though.  Appeal for a lesser charge and settle for something in between.  

My take on the event was that the Player was defenceless on the ground.  Smith made a deliberate attack to his head using the full force of his body to increase the impact.  
I cant see how this incident can be seen as anything other than as serious as it gets.

[JohnM]

I don't "advocate" as I'm not an "advocate". I believe in due process, not in a medieval witch-hunt. 

Still, any advance on 8 games? 

One thing, though. I will unconditionally  respect the final  outcome of the disciplinary process.

Will you? 

[EagleEyePie]

I don't think Smith has ever been suspended before and a good record plus a guilty plea often (but not always) gets the lowest end of the suspension range, so a 3 match ban wouldn't surprise me too much. I think the offence is at the upper end of a Grade E though, so starting with the higher recommended suspension of 5 games I think one will be knocked off for a good record and he'll probably get 4 games.

[bromleybulldog]

18 hours ago, JohnM said:

Any more bids? It's going up each time I look.

 

Oh, what the h*ck, I'll bid 'sine die'. The only bet likely to top that is probably 'death penalty'

[Damien]

 

 

[JohnM]

10

9

8

7

6

etc.

[Loiner]

37 minutes ago, JohnM said:

10

9

8

7

6

etc.

I think you are being very frivolous with your comments, if that had Bentley on Smith I hate to think of your response. 

[JohnM]

48 minutes ago, Loiner said:

I think you are being very frivolous with your comments, if that had Bentley on Smith I hate to think of your response. 

You have no information or evidence for any conjecture.

You are judging people by your own partisan standards. 

Do you respect the decision re Smith?  Yes or no?

Edited August 13 by JohnM

[Just Browny]

9 hours ago, JohnM said:

You have no information or evidence for any conjecture.

You are judging people by your own partisan standards. 

Do you respect the decision re Smith?  Yes or no?

I think you're very lucky that your trolling is tolerated as much as it is on here.

I also think it's a bit ridiculous for Smith's 'remorse' to have been mentioned by the disciplinary in relation to the incident. It's how you conduct yourself on the field that determines how much danger you put your opponents in, and clearly Smith thought he had done nothing wrong at the time from the mouthing at the ref. Playing it up for the disciplinary panel should make no odds.

[JohnM]

There's a difference between "trolling" and calling out the self-appointed disciplinary lynch-mob.

However, if that's how you feel,JB, then it's easily fixed.

1. Put me on "ignore"

2. Use the "report" function.