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?

Duffy did play a part, but the "couple of seconds" were whilst Jock was leaving the field and Duffy came on too quickly.

Of course, if 'Haven had more brains then they'd have appealed against a player coming on to the field without authorisation rather than there being fourteen men, but then again, have they got any brains to begin with?

thats what they did appeall against as well as 14 on the pitch which there was

Yes, there was, for a couple of seconds. There was a seagull on the pitch for longer than that.

You are beginning to sound like a dog with a bone. Please read my first post on this thread and let it go for goodness sake.

Has anyone noticed that both
[urlhttp://www.whitehavenrl.co.uk/[/url

and

[urlhttp://www.havenfans.co.uk/[/url

are down at the moment.

Unassociated / coincidence?

..for a couple of seconds....read it and weep. Have also had an email from the RFL who are looking at the incidents after the game and 'will be speaking to the ground safety officer to ensure these incidents don't happen again'

Haven haven't come out of last weekend too well have they....although you did get a bonus point

HavenFans.co.uk Forum - The Unofficial Whitehaven RLFC Forum
Due to extraordinary circumstances, the HavenFans.co.uk Forum has been taken offline. No further comment will be made at this time.

Ah but if we were to look at the 24 substitutions (12 each) how many times were there technically 14 (or even 15 with double substitutions) on the pitch?

When all the anger and feeling has died down, there are lessons to be learned about the use/abuse of that technical area and the number of officials to police it.

i agree it was a bit of a shambles

And I wouldn't have been too impressed if it had happened to us, especially in a tight match.

I bet Rolo was behind all of this............


I wonder if Leigh will be chucked out of the league for cheating, hmmmmm ??????

At the risk of repeating old news, the RFL have stated that there will be no charge against Duffy, or Leigh.

So..to translate that.. Leigh didn't cheat

Where does it say that the charges against Leigh have been dropped? That is just the charge against Duffy. Surely there is still the matter of a sent off player being replaced by a sub.