Page 9 of 10
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 12:28 pm
by butt monkey
GeoffN posted:
butt monkey posted:
Well we are alright there Geoff, because it definitely wasn't KC's shoulder that came into contact with Pat Richard's head.
But it wasn't his elbow or forearm either, which is what they look for.
I want him banned as much as everyone else (simply because of who it is) but I can see why they probably won't.
He has been charged with "Striking". I don't suppose it exactly mattered what part of the anatomy was used by KC. The RFL have also decided to (at least) warn him over this type of "tackle".
Personally, I am NOT after any type of vendetta or crusade against KC. I just wish foul play was punished and dealt with in a manner accordingly, rather than dismissed or ignored as this incident was.
Far too often, (IMO), it is "open season" as regards Wigan players.
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 12:33 pm
by Matthew
GeoffN posted:
But it wasn't his elbow or forearm either, which is what they look for.
I want him banned as much as everyone else (simply because of who it is) but I can see why they probably won't.
As I said in my earlier post; it shouldn't matter what part of his body knocked Pat out - it should be the fact that KFC's "challenge" struck the head of player with sufficient force to knock him out. Fletcher was banned for a couple of matches for reckless use of the forearm and he didn't knock the victim out.
If the RFL allows this to pass unpunished it gives a green light for people to use their shoulder (or any other part of their anatomy bar their arms) to strike the head of an opponent.
Had he broken Pat's jaw he should have been looking at sitting out the rest of the season. Luckily (and it was far more luck than judgement) he didn't; however that doesn't excuse what he did and he should be looking at a couple of matches for foul play.
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 5:48 pm
by Likely_Lad
GeoffN posted:
Likely_Lad posted:
GeoffN it isnt't legal to thrust your shoulder/upper arm into an opponents head. Not sure where you've got that from. :conf:
Here's the verdict from one of last week's disciplinary hearings:
Player: Gary Ellery (Featherstone Rovers Senior Academy)
Opponents: Keighley Cougars
Referee: R Everitt
Adjudication: Having viewed the DVD and listened to player Ellery’s explanations, the Committee felt that the tackle made by player Ellery was with the shoulder to the opponent and not with the elbow or forearm. The Committee was satisfied that player Ellery was not guilty of misconduct.
http://www.therfl.co.uk/about/index.php ... &areaid=44
I've not seen the tackle but to me that report doesn't suggest Ellery tackled the player's head. It looks to me that it was a tackle to the body but the ref thought he raised his elbow in the tackle.
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 5:49 pm
by jinkin jimmy
When will we get to know the decision?
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 5:57 pm
by Fujiman
jinkin jimmy posted:
When will we get to know the decision?
Today I think
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 6:14 pm
by robjoenz
Matthew posted:
I see KFC will be pleading his case at Red Hall tomorrow - has he asked you to be there in his defence Rob?
http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... elens.html
From the fact that Pat was knocked out; I think that we can all agree that KFC made contact with Richards' head during the "challenge".
So had he broken Pat's cheek/jaw during the challenge - would he have deserved a ban Rob?
The way I see is that there are two explanations:
1) KC went in to hurt PR with an intentional high tackle.
2) KC went in for a big hit on PR to dislodge the ball in the tackle, but due to PR falling he made contact with his head.
If 1) is found to be the case then he should be banned. If 2) is found to be the case then he shouldn't be banned, even if he had suffered a broken jaw.
From the footage I have seen and based on my previous comments on the challenge I can't see how anyone could prove without doubt that there was intent. Therefore, I think he will have no case to answer.
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 6:18 pm
by robjoenz
Likely_Lad posted:
Rob, I'm not trying to patronise you but have you ever played a game of Rugby League? Anyone who has has been in the position of KC and I will openly admit I've gone in before as KC did and attempted to make contact with my opponents head. Similarly I have been on the receiving end of 1 or 2 aswell. I accept that it happens and there's no point in pretending is doesn't.
That's ok likely_lad... no, I haven't played RL. I played union briefly at school but hated it.
I know it happens, but just because it happens sometimes doesn't prove that is the case in this instance. There will need to be proof beyond all reasonable doubt.
I don't think it's even fair to use past history here either. If found guilty then past history should be considered IMO, but all incidents should be judged individually just using the footage that is available.
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 6:23 pm
by cpwigan
Anyhow Rob would have been a winger
I personally hope KC is banned and our own Trent needs to be very careful. One or two challenges lately could have seen him attending the disciplinary if he had made contact.
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 6:31 pm
by robjoenz
cpwigan posted:
Anyhow Rob would have been a winger
Hey... I'm built like a rugby player me! Sam Tomkins.
...our own Trent needs to be very careful. One or two challenges lately could have seen him attending the disciplinary if he had made contact.
I've noticed this in quite a few games. He enjoys giving a little off the ball shove or two as well and messing about in the ruck.
Re: Our fate was sealed la...
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:06 pm
by robjoenz