Ferris
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 8:00 pm
£300 fine and 6 matches 
:conf:
:conf: WiganWarriorsFans.com
A site for fans of Wigan Warriors RLFC. News, views, statistics, profiles and more all contributed by supporters of Wigan RL.
https://www.wiganwarriorsfans.com/
Ferris
Page 1 of 2
Re: Ferris
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 9:28 pm
Shocking for a potential career ending style tackle, one that could paralyse a player.
Re: Ferris
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 10:25 pm
Pie Eater he plays for Leeds, what did you expect. If had been one of our lads they, the Disaplinary Committe would have been sending for the cross and nailspieeater wrote:£300 fine and 6 matches
Re: Ferris
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 10:28 pm
Not enough. ????
Re: Ferris
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2017 10:46 pm
Leeds seem to have reverted to their Bluey tactics. They used to play attractive rugby back in the day!
Re: Ferris
Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 12:09 am
Ollie could be out for the season and Ferris gets a holiday. It's a joke.
Re: Ferris
Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 7:46 am
Imo he shouldn't be allowed to play,till Ollie is fit then start his ban could have finished his rugby days all ways been a sly _ dirty player
Re: Ferris
Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 1:52 pm
Fans of other clubs would point very quickly to the O'Loughlin disciplinary decision last season. I'm not planning on going down that route too far as obviously the incidents, the on-field punishment, the type of injury etc. were all very different circumstances. It could be argued though that Lockers foul play caused a season ending injury so he shouldn't have played until Annakin could play again.
That's just one example where you'd have to follow the same approach as being suggested on Ferres, but it feels different.
The disciplinary panel don't hand out long enough bans. It's systemic to the disciplinary processes that this is the case. In general, lower grades are charged and the bottom of the ban range is handed out. That applies to all decisions for all clubs, there's no club bias in the system in my opinion. That means a Grade E and a 6 match ban is actually quite a strong message by the panel, relative to their usual offerings. It doesn't help Wigan directly (although indirectly a team above us lose a key player), it doesn't help Oliver Gildart sadly, but hopefully missing 1/4 of the regular season will be a deterrent to anything similar. I just hope that the next player who does something similar but the player somehow avoids serious injury is still fully punished. That's how you cut it out. Treat the offence as serious as much as the outcome.
That's just one example where you'd have to follow the same approach as being suggested on Ferres, but it feels different.
The disciplinary panel don't hand out long enough bans. It's systemic to the disciplinary processes that this is the case. In general, lower grades are charged and the bottom of the ban range is handed out. That applies to all decisions for all clubs, there's no club bias in the system in my opinion. That means a Grade E and a 6 match ban is actually quite a strong message by the panel, relative to their usual offerings. It doesn't help Wigan directly (although indirectly a team above us lose a key player), it doesn't help Oliver Gildart sadly, but hopefully missing 1/4 of the regular season will be a deterrent to anything similar. I just hope that the next player who does something similar but the player somehow avoids serious injury is still fully punished. That's how you cut it out. Treat the offence as serious as much as the outcome.
Re: Ferris
Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 8:37 pm
Ferres is considering appealing the length of the ban.
http://www.seriousaboutrl.com/ferres-appeal-5962/
http://www.seriousaboutrl.com/ferres-appeal-5962/
Re: Ferris
Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 10:34 pm
Do SL still have the rule is the appeal is baseless and a waste of time they can increase the games banned.East Stand Faithful wrote:Ferres is considering appealing the length of the ban.
http://www.seriousaboutrl.com/ferres-appeal-5962/