over the last 2 years Sam Tomkins has had little protection from referees and it was only a matter of time before he was seriousely hurt (remember Leeds Rhinos and Abbletts scandalous late hit) . we talk a lot about respect - when are the RFL going to do something about protecting our brightest stars. yes it's a man's game but Raynor's assault would have got him arrested and locked up if it hadn't been on the field of play
come on RFL - show you are serious about the game and ban Raynor for 3 months
avid fan
Sam Tomkins
Re: Sam Tompkins
Agreed
Remember is Tomkins not TomPkins
Remember is Tomkins not TomPkins
-
ancientnloyal
- Posts: 14533
- Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 10:33 pm
- Location: Howe Bridge
- Contact:
Re: Sam Tompkins
Was Raynor's attempt just mistimed? :omg:
Plus, you could tell straight away watching on TV something serious was up, the camera seemed to be on Sam for an age until the realisation he was out cold.
Plus, you could tell straight away watching on TV something serious was up, the camera seemed to be on Sam for an age until the realisation he was out cold.
https://www.ancientandloyal.com/
Now on Bluesky Social Media posting regularly pre-War snippets
https://bsky.app/profile/ancientandloyal.com
Now on Bluesky Social Media posting regularly pre-War snippets
https://bsky.app/profile/ancientandloyal.com
Re: Sam Tompkins
spelling isn't my strongest suite when I am annoyed!
-
Kittwazzer
- Posts: 11308
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:31 pm
-
Kittwazzer
- Posts: 11308
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:31 pm
Re: Sam Tomkins
I have to hold my hands up, I thought Sam was (successfully) milking it! The speed of it all and what seemed insignificant contact, even in slow motion, seemed negligible.
My bad!
My bad!
Re: Sam Tomkins
First ever try by an unconcious player?
Should have been an 8 pointer.
Should have been an 8 pointer.
Re: Sam Tomkins
I think the RFL need to come down hard on Raynor, he had no reason to swing his arm like that.
Sam was holding the ball out so why aim for the head if he is trying to dislodge the ball, likewise why aim for the head if your trying to tackle the player around the legs.
RFU banned Manu Tuilaga for 10 games for 'thuggish' behaviour and I don't see how Raynor's swinging arm was any less severe than being punched in the face (which it effectively was). I know the Tuilaga ban was reduced to 5 games because of provocation but what provocation did Sam give other than being a better player than Raynor.
Knowing the RFL they will make Sam write a letter of apology for getting in the way of Raynors arm.
Sam was holding the ball out so why aim for the head if he is trying to dislodge the ball, likewise why aim for the head if your trying to tackle the player around the legs.
RFU banned Manu Tuilaga for 10 games for 'thuggish' behaviour and I don't see how Raynor's swinging arm was any less severe than being punched in the face (which it effectively was). I know the Tuilaga ban was reduced to 5 games because of provocation but what provocation did Sam give other than being a better player than Raynor.
Knowing the RFL they will make Sam write a letter of apology for getting in the way of Raynors arm.
Re: Sam Tomkins
Sam has been getting more than his fair share of attention without getting any protection from the refereeing brigade. Raynor's attack will no doubt be glossed over by the RFL as usual. Should be banned for a minimum 3 games for my money. There has been a number of comments recently about the code of 'respect'. Respect is something you earn not something which is given as a right,and it's about time the RFL disciplinary did something to earn some.
-
bikerharry
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:57 pm
Re: Sam Tomkins
Mick Potter said he thought the player was trying to dislodge the ball? That being so, why them was he swinging his fist in a lateral motion as if throwing a punch rather than in a downward motion with an open hand? Also, if he was aiming at the ball, how did he wind up making contact with Sam's head?
I do think it's rare in professional sports to have one player trying to deliberately injury another. Most times I would say it is a mistimed, or poorley executed tackle that leads to injury. That said, aggression and adrenalin of the situation sometimes gets the better of the players and causes an action that they ordinarly would think better of doing, (how else would you explain 26 grown men knocking 10 bells of you know what out of each other when a fight errupts on the pitch and then them all shaking hands and going for a pint at the end of the game?) On this occassion I think it was a rush of blood action.
However, whether it was an adrenalin fueled, rush of blood act of stupidity, or just a poolerly executed attempt to dislodge the ball, only Raynor will ever know, but I do think the whole debate as to intent can sometimes detract from the fact that the end result was the same, a young talentled player was left out cold through the act of anonther player. Alright, in this instance it looks like Sam will be ok thankfully, and no long term injury, but what if that hadn't been the case? What if his jaw was broke or worse? Would it matter then if Raynor had not intended to hurt him. He was still doing something he shouldn't have been doing, and the punishment should reflect that, but I doubt my sentiments will be reflected by the RFL.
As a side note, I find it interesting that Potter sites the incident as a turning point for Bradford in the game. I think Madge could probably argue the loss of one of our side's most influential players and major re-shuffle to the team wasn't in his game plan either! Stop moaning Mick and get on with it. Hopefully if the RFL have any sense you'll have plenty of time to work with Gareth on his technique.
I do think it's rare in professional sports to have one player trying to deliberately injury another. Most times I would say it is a mistimed, or poorley executed tackle that leads to injury. That said, aggression and adrenalin of the situation sometimes gets the better of the players and causes an action that they ordinarly would think better of doing, (how else would you explain 26 grown men knocking 10 bells of you know what out of each other when a fight errupts on the pitch and then them all shaking hands and going for a pint at the end of the game?) On this occassion I think it was a rush of blood action.
However, whether it was an adrenalin fueled, rush of blood act of stupidity, or just a poolerly executed attempt to dislodge the ball, only Raynor will ever know, but I do think the whole debate as to intent can sometimes detract from the fact that the end result was the same, a young talentled player was left out cold through the act of anonther player. Alright, in this instance it looks like Sam will be ok thankfully, and no long term injury, but what if that hadn't been the case? What if his jaw was broke or worse? Would it matter then if Raynor had not intended to hurt him. He was still doing something he shouldn't have been doing, and the punishment should reflect that, but I doubt my sentiments will be reflected by the RFL.
As a side note, I find it interesting that Potter sites the incident as a turning point for Bradford in the game. I think Madge could probably argue the loss of one of our side's most influential players and major re-shuffle to the team wasn't in his game plan either! Stop moaning Mick and get on with it. Hopefully if the RFL have any sense you'll have plenty of time to work with Gareth on his technique.