This is a quote from a Haven fan who I know that was at the game on Sunday.

"Yep that's right, they brought duffy on illegally and he was involved in the play that got them the try. The try should be disallowed which would mean a win for us! The ref sent duffy off, they still had 13 men on the pitch and he was then subbed on! :/ makes ok sense that sums up how well the ref played, didn't have a clue"

But the Haven fan is wrong about 14 men and the DVD shows it.

Re Billy's comment actually I do otherwise what is he for ?

It is frivolous and this pathetic reaction from the Haven club is just as daft as when they last made a complaint about my club when they suggested a Leigh fan assaulted a Whitehaven fan at Hilton Park with a baseball bat.

Re the red card I think that is a red herring otherwise why did the ref allow the player who had been substituted to return to the field of play ? I suppose you would have to ask the ref about that.

Facts are facts. Leigh won and that is that.

When you lot were giving us a good hiding you were still moaning about the ref. It's bred in to you over there!

TBH: not our problem.

It's Whitehaven's and Leigh's. Oh, and the RFL.

It is our problem. It affects everyone - we're all part of the Rugby League family. Someone please - think of the children.

TBH i feel that fax fans are only truely interested in this in the hope that Leigh are deducted points to keep us near to them, otherwise we wouldnt really give a stuff. Its not the fault of either club, its down to poor officials and Duffy not following the correct procedure for interchanges. We just need to focus on getting a win there next week!

This has been an accident waiting to happen for some club for a while now.

We only just got away with earlier this season when the fourth official went on to say that we had 14 players on the field - this was when we put Penky on for Glees and the former sprinted on whilst the latter dawdled off looking over his shoulder as play continued.

By the time they counted up Glees was in the dugout with a top on.

Some subs - Dave Larder is a classic example - can't wait and want to jump off the bench and straight on but you have to go through the fourth official. And if a player is injured there is massive pressure from the coaching staff to get a replacement onto the pitch.

One problem that the RFL need to look at though is the fact that sometimes there is one bloke for both times...and if he's busy doing something else it can get frustrating.

Similar thing happened a few years ago at St. Helens, Cunningham didnt leave the pitch fast enough whilst been replaced, substitute came on... Saints scored, don't think Saints got any punishment as Cunningham was deemed to not be involved in the Try. Or, more likely being it was the RFL dealing with the matter, because they're St Helens...

Only one punishment for being deemed as "cheating." Expulsion from the competition!! Sure that happened somewhere recently

Batley should be installed as championship leaders and Swinton promoted to the Championship. Fax promoted to take the place of the Druids in Sooperleeg.
Unfortunately Carlsberg don't run the RFL..........but if they did?

We would all have to drink awfull Danish Larger at matches

XXXX

not sure if they had 14 men on or not.
But john duffy was red carded after they scored the match winning try for illegally entering the field of play.He didn't go on via the 4th offical and didn't hand in his subs card.This only came to light after the conversion, when just before the restart the match comisioner came to the touchline to inform the ref

problem is he provided the pass for the try and then once sent off , they were allowed to bring Mconnell back on meaning they stil had 13 men for the remaining 20 mins

make any sense out of that lot if you can cause god knows what's going to happen

But would it be £3 a pint?

It has yet to be proven that he did enter the field of play illegally. The suggestion is, that he handed the card to the 4th official, who dropped it. Duffy was then instructed to go back to the 4th official, which he did and then returned to the fray - joining his 12 teammates, as McConnell had left the pitch.

I do have sympathy with the 4th official, who was surrounded by over 20 other people on the touchline. Amazingly each team can have up to 13 people in that 'technical area' but they all have to sit down! As if!)

In two recent games at LSV there have been similar, 'unusual' incidents. Against Sheffield we had a player red-carded and played with 12 men for about 50 minutes. Late in the second half the MC counted the Leigh players and went down to the 'bench', where he appeared to be trying to persuade the Leigh staff to put on a 13th player - who hovered between the pitch and the bench, until staff pointed out to the MC that we had the correct number of players on the field.

Then against Featherstone, their sub who was waiting to enter the pitch, was yellow carded - presumably for being about a foot inside the playing area. They too were allowed to retain 13 men on the pitch.

I guess all this will get sorted, but it just may be that the 4th official or MC were at fault. Meanwhile, something should be done to control the staff in the 'technical area' (of both teams) and provide two 'interchange officials' at every game. (there was only one at Whitehaven - due to no fault of the home club)

By not being sure meaning you might have seen the DVD but do not want to admit it. You and I and everone else who was at the game knows this is an absolutely pathetic attempt to complain against playing a game against a team with the same number of players which Haven lost in the hope another lunatic at RL HQ agrees with your blinkered hope.

I am beginning to think some Haven fans think the world is flat.That some backward Ayatollah or someone equally as daft might take this appeal seriously just to show the world that the Supreme being lives a few miles South of Workington.

i clear state i dont know and for the record i haven't seen the dvd .But 13 or 14 is not the issue, its the rest of my post which you seem to have missed all together FOR SOME REASON

and if he wasnt on the field illegally why was he given a red card, as i posted else where if this happened to leigh they would be the first to appeal as would any club cause it was a complete farce

Oh I give up. A similar thing happened against Fev when we lost to them last week.

This is not an issue that deserves a second thought it is like replaying a game because an official missed a knock on or a forward pass. That is how pathetic it is.

the fev incident was not similar their player(a sub about to come on) was yellow carded for standing over the touchline with out permission, he didnt enter the game and certainly didn't provide the pass for the try that won the game, only to be red carded after the try was scored nothing like the fev incident

are you saying if this happened against leigh you wouldnt appeall get real

Yes.

When i first saw this i thought Duffy was literally the 14th man on the pitch, who made the tackle/pass whatever. That clearly would have been something to moan about.

But Duffy being a bit of a pillock and not handing the card to the fourth official or whatever before replacing the other Leigh bloke (still making it 13 us 13), doesn't give Duffy or Leigh an advantage in the tackle or the move. Had he come on legit it still would have happend. It's just, for whatever reason, the little piece of paper was handed over wrongly. Duffy should maybe get a fine, but that's it. I don't see 'Haven's problem to be honest.

again i was not there but from all the reports and comments on lots of different forums.
The issue seems to be Duffy was not officailly allowed on the pitch ( not having permission from the fourth official) and then has been involved in a try.

Also it has been said when he first came on he made a try saving tackle on a haven player dislodging the ball, from the resulting scrum leigh went up the field and scored.

If duffy was sent off i dont understand why leigh wee allowed to put another player on.

It is all very confusing. That is rugby for you

Because, as he wasn't considered to be 'legally' on the pitch, he was a substitute and therefore simply not allowed to return to the field and we had to operate with three subs - same thing happened to Andy Kain when he played against us for Fev last week.

AH AH,



Fev are guilty too.

Ban them an all! Fax win the league CHAMPIOOONIES

The RFL need to sort out proper (and I mean proper) fourth officlals.

No good sending lads who look about 12 who are totally overawed by what's goin on around them.

And there needs to be a minimum of one per team.

Now can we move on...

It really begs the question over the massive hoo-hah over the whole scenario if Duffy was only on for 'a couple of seconds'.

Were those people who were 'actually there' and saw Duffy set up the winning try talking out of their derrieres?