Re: Disciplinary Process. : Tue Mar 05, 2019 6:58 pm  

Riderofthepalehorse wrote:

Well done Rovers for appealing and supporting one of their players, risking an increase in the penalty, but having the balls to test the system.

So you think Taylor would have had his 2 bans reduced, bearing in mind a player is missing 8-10 weeks as a result of one of those "incidents".

Re: Disciplinary Process. : Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:17 pm  

ccs wrote:

So you think Taylor would have had his 2 bans reduced, bearing in mind a player is missing 8-10 weeks as a result of one of those "incidents".

Firstly I don’t, and neither do you, know what the outcome of an appeal would have been, but one thing is for sure if you don’t ask, you dont get.

Secondly as far as I know, if a player is injured due to the actions of another, the length of time the injured player is missing, is not a guideline for the length of any ban.

Luckily as we have won two out of three Tag was unfairly banned for, the blow has been softened somewhat.

Re: Disciplinary Process. : Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:23 pm  

Riderofthepalehorse wrote:

Firstly I don’t, and neither do you, know what the outcome of an appeal would have been, but one thing is for sure if you don’t ask, you dont get.

Secondly as far as I know, if a player is injured due to the actions of another, the length of time the injured player is missing, is not a guideline for the length of any ban.

Luckily as we have won two out of three Tag was unfairly banned for, the blow has been softened somewhat.

Maybe the club knew that an appeal would not have been successful.

The charge was based on "to twist, bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player", the fact that the player was injured proves the likelihood of guilt, and grade C is 2-3 matches. Accidental is unlikely to be an acceptable excuse. An appeal could easily have increased the ban to 3 matches, not worth the risk.

Re: Disciplinary Process. : Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:35 pm  

ccs wrote:

Maybe the club knew that an appeal would not have been successful.

The charge was based on "to twist, bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player", the fact that the player was injured proves guilt, and grade C is 2-3 matches.

Yes you can supply the RFL justification for his sentence, but all these incidents can be interpreted differently, I have seen these so called incidents, I presume you have as well, did you actually see any intent by our player.

I did see Jack Hughes bending the neck of Kenny Edwards, and amazingly the panel didn’t manage to catch that one. Inconsistency is angering the paying public.

Re: Disciplinary Process. : Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:42 pm  

I guess it depends what you mean by intent, does the panel actually take that into account?

The game was on sky, we all know that some camera angles can be inconclusive, and others give a different story.

Re: Disciplinary Process. : Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:46 pm  

ccs wrote:

I guess it depends what you mean by intent, does the panel actually take that into account?

Sorry I mean what was your view of it.

Re: Disciplinary Process. : Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:49 pm  

Riderofthepalehorse wrote:

Sorry I mean what was your view of it.

I only saw it "live", I didn't see anything at the time, infact, at first, I though the ref was putting Houghton on report for speaking out of turn!

The game was on sky, we all know that some camera angles can be inconclusive, and others give a different story.

Re: Disciplinary Process. : Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:57 pm  

Like me, at the game, then seen and watched it on tv, can’t see anything but Tag making and assisting in the tackle, then getting back quickly to defend again, I suppose if you look hard enough you can find fault with anything. If we beat Leeds on Friday, maybe they should have given him longer.

Re: Disciplinary Process. : Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:14 pm  

Riderofthepalehorse wrote:

Like me, at the game, then seen and watched it on tv, can’t see anything but Tag making and assisting in the tackle, then getting back quickly to defend again, I suppose if you look hard enough you can find fault with anything. If we beat Leeds on Friday, maybe they should have given him longer.

I reckon he should just have knocked the referee over, just to keep the RFL bias to the top four going.

Re: Disciplinary Process. : Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:04 pm  

MGarbutt1986 wrote:

I reckon he should just have knocked the referee over, just to keep the RFL bias to the top four going.

Are you attempting to advocate physical violence towards a match official?