JWH sent into retirement by the RFL

[Worzel]

13 minutes ago, Click said:

Yes it was a standard rugby collision, apart from the part where he hits him high.

He's 36, he should have learnt how to join a tackle without hitting the opponents head.

Yeah, er, nah. If we went through each set every week, you'd find one of those in most of them. 

[Click]

1 minute ago, Worzel said:

Yeah, er, nah. If we went through each set every week, you'd find one of those in most of them. 

That's an impressive amount of high shots to the chin that are missed then. 

It's amazing any players come out of a game without having had a HIA I guess.

[StandOffHalf]

20 minutes ago, Worzel said:

For clarity, this is the "incident". Pretty standard second-man-to-complete-the-tackle affair, not any sense of malice in here, no deliberate targeting of the head. Standard rugby collision. There's even a 3rd man in on top afterwards so you can't make the case it's late, or that it was unnecessary for JWH to join the 1st man.

 

Very little in that. Bennison is low to the ground and the impact isn't high force. Doesn't the VR only come in if the incident is a reportable offence?

Hope he appeals. He doesn't deserve to miss a GF for that.

[Worzel]

1 minute ago, Click said:

That's an impressive amount of high shots to the chin that are missed then. 

It's amazing any players come out of a game without having had a HIA I guess.

I'll leave you with your reality distortion engine mate, I've heard they're great fun. 

[WN83]

5 minutes ago, Worzel said:

Yeah, er, nah. If we went through each set every week, you'd find one of those in most of them. 

You might but I think the difference to the majority would be that Bennison fails a HIA on the back of it. I don't agree with it but they always take that end result in to their considerations. Don't you actually get an extra point on any charge when somebody fails a HIA? 

Common sense to me would say the contact happens so low to the ground, that even with a failed HIA, it is purely a rugby accident, that will always happen in a game. 

[Worzel]

15 minutes ago, WN83 said:

You might but I think the difference to the majority would be that Bennison fails a HIA on the back of it. I don't agree with it but they always take that end result in to their considerations. Don't you actually get an extra point on any charge when somebody fails a HIA? 

Common sense to me would say the contact happens so low to the ground, that even with a failed HIA, it is purely a rugby accident, that will always happen in a game. 

Yeah I hear you, and personally I'm not a fan of the HIA of the opponent adding weight to the charge. For me it's only the action of the defender that counts. One player might get concussed and another not, anybody who watches boxing knows that, it's not a reliable indicator of the severity of the defenders actions or intent. Similarly, accidents happen in contact, I don't know why we'd be penalising those unless they're negligent. 

I think we have to be better at differentiating rugby incidents from foul or negligent play. I accept refs making different judgements in real time, even video refs in the relative heat of the moment. But on a delayed video review we really should be taking a more measured assessment of incidents than this.

[Damien]

18 minutes ago, Worzel said:

Yeah I hear you, and personally I'm not a fan of the HIA of the opponent adding weight to the charge. For me it's only the action of the defender that counts. One player might get concussed and another not, anybody who watches boxing knows that, it's not a reliable indicator of the severity of the defenders actions or intent. Similarly, accidents happen in contact, I don't know why we'd be penalising those unless they're negligent. 

I think we have to be better at differentiating rugby incidents from foul or negligent play. I accept refs making different judgements in real time, even video refs in the relative heat of the moment. But on a delayed video review we really should be taking a more measured assessment of incidents than this.

I disagree. Foul play and him failing his HIA saw him miss the rest of the game, having a direct impact on Saints and the player. Indeed if Saints had got to the final he'd have been forced to miss it.

[graveyard johnny]

the way its going players in the future mould of  JWH - Morley - S Burgess - Barrie Mac - J Graham - Tallis - Hock= Tuta - Geyer - R Bailey - to name but a few prob wont take up the game and if they do wont stick with it, whats the point of constantly been sin binned, suspended, sent off and fined? must be so frustrating these days when a lot of the contact is unavoidable with players coming in low with the ball etc - enjoyed watched "the big dog" play over the years - great character and tough nut of the sport - hope he plays on Sat 

[Damien]

4 minutes ago, graveyard johnny said:

the way its going players in the future mould of  JWH - Morley - S Burgess - Barrie Mac - J Graham - Tallis - Hock= Tuta - Geyer - R Bailey - to name but a few prob wont take up the game and if they do wont stick with it, whats the point of constantly been sin binned, suspended, sent off and fined? must be so frustrating these days when a lot of the contact is unavoidable with players coming in low with the ball etc - enjoyed watched "the big dog" play over the years - great character and tough nut of the sport - hope he plays on Sat 

By ad large I don't think kids take up the game just to be dirty.

[graveyard johnny]

7 minutes ago, Damien said:

By ad large I don't think kids take up the game just to be dirty.

they dont but younger versions of the players I  mentioned will just end up thinking "sod this" I know I  would 

[Wollo Wollo Wayoo]

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I would have thought that the more appropriate response from a HKR fan would have been relief that he wasn't punished more at the time and KR maybe down to 12 for ten minutes or more.

You got lucky on that one.

Spot on mate, spot on.   

[Damien]

1 minute ago, graveyard johnny said:

they dont but younger versions of the players I  mentioned will just end up thinking "sod this" I know I  would 

I don't see why they would. It's not like these incidents are endemic in the youth game and if they are it's blatant foul play. Surely we want children not getting their heads taken off when playing a game and I daresay allowing fair play would put off more kids than it encourages.

[RP London]

1 hour ago, StandOffHalf said:

Very little in that. Bennison is low to the ground and the impact isn't high force. Doesn't the VR only come in if the incident is a reportable offence?

Hope he appeals. He doesn't deserve to miss a GF for that.

Just to clear up one thing... he isn't getting the ban for THAT... he is getting the ban for an accumulation of poor decisions and poor tackles throughout the season. In the same way as if you are on 9 points on your driving licences and you get caught doing 34 or 35 in a 30 you will lose your licence but you haven't lost your licence for doing 34 or 35 in a 30.. its for the fact you cannot seem to control your speed or read the signs.

 

[RP London]

23 minutes ago, graveyard johnny said:

the way its going players in the future mould of  JWH - Morley - S Burgess - Barrie Mac - J Graham - Tallis - Hock= Tuta - Geyer - R Bailey - to name but a few prob wont take up the game and if they do wont stick with it, whats the point of constantly been sin binned, suspended, sent off and fined? must be so frustrating these days when a lot of the contact is unavoidable with players coming in low with the ball etc - enjoyed watched "the big dog" play over the years - great character and tough nut of the sport - hope he plays on Sat 

I suppose there is a balance though to be had with discouraging the wrong end of those players and kids walking away from the game becuase they keep getting hit around the head and the news is about players getting brain injuries.. 

I dont think we have the balance quite right at the moment but I'm not a neuro scientist/lawyer/insurance risk analyst... 

Something will stop some kids from wanting to take up the game.. I coach youth teams and I see both sides of "you have to sort your technique out or your just not going to play" to kids/parents who are too worried to let their kids step up from tag to contact... 

if you can find that balance then fair play to you but there are some very bright people in both codes trying and getting told they're not getting it right.

[graveyard johnny]

dont think any players go out with the intention to take others heads off- some will always get penalised more than others due to their style of play 

[Exiled Wiganer]

2 hours ago, Worzel said:

I have agency. You don't have to agree with me, but you don't get to re-write my words. Crack on criticising them, that's cool.

I've always been the view that punishment should be proportionate. I don't think this is. Let's not pretend that descretion doesn't exit, and doesn't ever get applied, because it does. Lam didn't miss last week's semi-final fr example. 

From a Hull KR perspective as WN83 says we probably have a stronger 17 without him so I don't have a dog in the fight for that reason, it's not like he'll be banned from the dressing room or the sideline so his winning attitude will still be present. I just think as a long-term servant of the game he deserves better. 

Indeed. A one game ban would have been sufficient. 

[RP London]

17 minutes ago, graveyard johnny said:

dont think any players go out with the intention to take others heads off- some will always get penalised more than others due to their style of play 

If you want to play close to the edge then you will need to be able to suffer the consequences of doing so. Otherwise you can coach/train yourself to not hit high, time the flop right etc etc.

[Dave T]

Well, the clubs demanded changes to the system, this is what we got.

I really dont understand what was wrong with reviewing each incident individually and punishing based on severity, with higher punishments for repeat offenders. 

This incident is undeserving of a ban for such a big game, but clubs demanded change, this is what they got.

[phiggins]

19 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Well, the clubs demanded changes to the system, this is what we got.

I really dont understand what was wrong with reviewing each incident individually and punishing based on severity, with higher punishments for repeat offenders. 

This incident is undeserving of a ban for such a big game, but clubs demanded change, this is what they got.

Yes, there was a demand for change, but I think there's merit in reviewing and refining the system. Currently it feels like the system crosses the line between having extra punishment for a poor previous record, and double jeopardy on time served for the same offence.

I'd rather see it simplified a bit, call out red card offences and give an instant 2+ game ban. And use the cumulative points for the lesser offences. But with amnesties at certain points in the season, like in football, you get 1 match ban for 5 bookings in the first 10 games or so, but after that, you need to get 10 bookings by a certain time and get a 2 match ban. 

[StandOffHalf]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

Just to clear up one thing... he isn't getting the ban for THAT... he is getting the ban for an accumulation of poor decisions and poor tackles throughout the season. In the same way as if you are on 9 points on your driving licences and you get caught doing 34 or 35 in a 30 you will lose your licence but you haven't lost your licence for doing 34 or 35 in a 30.. its for the fact you cannot seem to control your speed or read the signs.

 

Well, he is missing a Grand Final for that. It's what pushes him to the threshold, under this points system.

[Barry Badrinath]

1 hour ago, graveyard johnny said:

the way its going players in the future mould of  JWH - Morley - S Burgess - Barrie Mac - J Graham - Tallis - Hock= Tuta - Geyer - R Bailey - to name but a few prob wont take up the game and if they do wont stick with it, whats the point of constantly been sin binned, suspended, sent off and fined? must be so frustrating these days when a lot of the contact is unavoidable with players coming in low with the ball etc - enjoyed watched "the big dog" play over the years - great character and tough nut of the sport - hope he plays on Sat 

yeah we definitely need more gaz hock's in the sport dont we.

[Barry Badrinath]

38 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Well, the clubs demanded changes to the system, this is what we got.

I really dont understand what was wrong with reviewing each incident individually and punishing based on severity, with higher punishments for repeat offenders. 

This incident is undeserving of a ban for such a big game, but clubs demanded change, this is what they got.

there's a karma to this, with a couple of hits he's got away with this year (tai near the end of the challenge cup)  that something like this is his downfall.

 

Or if he'd been dealt with properly throughout the year he would have probably missed the end of the season suspended anyway.

[RP London]

6 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

Well, he is missing a Grand Final for that. It's what pushes him to the threshold, under this points system.

No he's missing it for all of what he has done throughout the season. He isn't missing it because of that one event.. if he hadn't have done any one of the others then he wouldn't have been in this position. 

[StandOffHalf]

Just now, RP London said:

No he's missing it for all of what he has done throughout the season. He isn't missing it because of that one event.. if he hadn't have done any one of the others then he wouldn't have been in this position. 

If he hadn't have done this, he'd have been playing.

[RP London]

1 minute ago, Barry Badrinath said:

there's a karma to this, with a couple of hits he's got away with this year (tai near the end of the challenge cup)  that something like this is his downfall.

 

Or if he'd been dealt with properly throughout the year he would have probably missed the end of the season suspended anyway.

The last paragraph is an interesting one... IF he had played like this through the season and punishment was as before, how many games would he have missed during the season and what effect would that have had on the season.. or just the play offs