Re: Sia : Tue May 21, 2013 5:03 pm  

chapylad wrote:

Player does not use illegal shoulder charge as arm is not tucked into side and is minimal hip rotation. Contact is made with head however opponent contributes to result of tackle by dipping and turning head into contact. Worthy of on field penalty

Think that sums it up so why a red card?

I thought contact with the head was a red card.

Re: Sia : Tue May 21, 2013 5:19 pm  

it's Magic Weekend coming up I wasn't expecting anyone to get banned from any team unless it was a really bad tackle etc.

Re: Sia : Tue May 21, 2013 6:03 pm  

No1 Saint wrote: I'd say common sense but I doubt that played a part. The random ban generator obviously just worked in our favour this week. Look , anyone can play http://www.mathgoodies.com/calculators/ ... ustom.html Hey I just got a 5 match ban, although I copped a plea, so it been reduced to 3 on the appeal of my fabulous banana shoes.

No1 Saint wrote: I'd say common sense but I doubt that played a part. The random ban generator obviously just worked in our favour this week. Look , anyone can play http://www.mathgoodies.com/calculators/ ... ustom.html Hey I just got a 5 match ban, although I copped a plea, so it been reduced to 3 on the appeal of my fabulous banana shoes.

Re: Sia : Tue May 21, 2013 6:17 pm  

Agent Mulder wrote:

it's Magic Weekend coming up I wasn't expecting anyone to get banned from any team unless it was a really bad tackle etc.

Spot on.
Soliolas tackle was as bad if not worse than Gardners in the HKR cup tie, As was JJB's. The inconsistency in the disciplinary is one of the things ALL RL fans find annoying. It was the same with Griffins "challenge" on Matty Smith that put him out for a couple of weeks.

Re: Sia : Tue May 21, 2013 7:14 pm  

I think they are probably more lenient with the shoulder charge, given that it's a rule they have thrown in mid season.

Re: Sia : Tue May 21, 2013 7:18 pm  

Albion wrote:

I thought contact with the head was a red card.

I think the outcome states no shoulder charge and the player contributes to the incident by ducking into the hit.
I would guess another week both JJB and Soloiola would cop a 1 game ban but this time nothing.

Re: Sia : Tue May 21, 2013 7:29 pm  

chapylad wrote:

I think the outcome states no shoulder charge and the player contributes to the incident by ducking into the hit.
I would guess another week both JJB and Soloiola would cop a 1 game ban but this time nothing.

Soliola wouldn't cop a ban on any week as the shoulder charge wasn't to the head. A shoulder charge is only ever punished by a penalty but it says in the ruling that on this occasion the referee decided to play advantage (hence no penalty against us for the shoulder charge). Only when the shoulder charge is to the head might a player be sent off/banned.

Re: Sia : Tue May 21, 2013 8:50 pm  

Personally I find it rather puzzling that the RFL didn't give McGuire a ban for his high tackle against Crabtree as he "hit the chest and finished around the head" and so no problem. Yet last night, the Sky team and the ref seemed to be on the "finish around the head" is a problem bus.

Re: Sia : Wed May 22, 2013 12:38 pm  

I didn't think there was much in it. Baileys challenge on Puletua and Moon on Wellens were just as bad, but none warrent ban or cautions.

The game is going a bit soft these days.

Re: Sia : Wed May 22, 2013 12:53 pm  

goobervision wrote:

Personally I find it rather puzzling that the RFL didn't give McGuire a ban for his high tackle against Crabtree as he "hit the chest and finished around the head" and so no problem. Yet last night, the Sky team and the ref seemed to be on the "finish around the head" is a problem bus.

The Sky team are always making a melodrama out of nothing.