No Tyrer ? better score all ours behind the sticks then !!!


Up the Fax

I think we're without Matautia, banned for the high tackle against Toronto, but Dawson should be available this week, with his hearing next week.

I am thinking with Leigh losing the last two the confidence will be shot.

Fax by 12

Hopefully a strong ref and if we can build pressure early they will lose their heads (and hopefully won’t take ours). If it starts that way then we are in with a chance but if our defence starts like we did the other week then it could be a runaway score.

Heads on from the start and we should have a decent chance.

Dawson's hearing (and Mata'utia's next one!) are tonight. Remember, we were playing a Sooper Dooper League team last week, and we play by their disciplinary rules - not the Championship ones!

Whatever the outcome, I reckon they'll be available for next season against 'Fax!

(if they stay with us

)

Whatever the outcome, I reckon they'll be available for next season against 'Fax! (if they stay with us )

I stand corrected. Can we not transfer their bans to Larne Patrick, he's never going to be picked anyway.

In all seriousness, I think it will be Owens and Bailey for Mata'utia and Dawson, but I fear all the goings on the last couple of weeks will take some recovering from.

A good ref in charge .................. S. Mikalauskas.

Shane Grady a very able deputy for goalkicking duties.

Cas's big win at Hull KR might see minimal (if any) changes for their visit to Warrington. So what's the betting QLT on DR?

Depends on your definition of a 'good' ref! We had him for the Toronto game, at Blackpool, and weren't too thrilled. Still, as you aren't a new team, from foreign lands, things may improve!

Dunno about that, Al, I watched that match (and it was a great game) and thought he had a good game.

I reckon the standard of refereeing in the Championship is the best it's ever been. The one we had at the Bash, Grant, is very good, Jack Smith also as are Pearson and Crashley.

Alan, tonight’s hearing, 5 matches for Matt Dawson and two charges 1 and 4 matches for Peter Mata’utia.

I know!

Can't say the bans are unfair, either. Still, the Disciplinary have now set the benchmark for dangerous tackles and abuse of referees - I wonder if they will continue to dish out similar bans, for similar offences?

Exactly, if it had been one of the blue eyed boys players involved in the abuse the ref would have got the 5 games.

Can't keep pace with rule changes,anyone enlighten ?
1.EGP scrapped ?
2.penalty notice = ban ? if so why not call it a fecking ban ?
3.How can you be banned after being sin binned ? punishment served on day-wasn't on report or unseen by officials ?

Alan, there is plenty of precedent for the Mata'utia ban - for instance Ben Pomeroy for Catalans two or three years ago (6 games) and Luke Briscoe last year (five games) - I'd say the other two were slightly "worse" instances of similar tackles so 4 games seems about right.

As for Dawson-Jones, I think it was fairly plain what he said to the ref. I don't think there have been many clear-cut cases involving questioning the ref's integrity but Paul March got 4 games for a similar offence which was graded at C a couple of years ago (and later a 2-month stadium ban IIRC) and Hardaker got 5 games for homophobic abuse, so it seems reasonably in line with previous sanctions.

No Leigh fan are questioning the bans it's when you get another player with a 1 match ban for foul and abusive language to an official but dawson 5 you can understand fans scratching their heads.What about Tommy leuluai getting no matches for the cannon ball tackle on Westwood never mind bussey from Toronto for the cheap shot on the young lad at swinton..fans are likely to say is it one rule for one and different rules for other teams

Presumably the difference between the 1 game and 5 game ban is that one was for foul and abusive language and the other for questioning the ref's integrity, which I think many would suggest is a whole different ballpark.

For all that I compared some earlier incidents to the Leigh ones, every incident is different. I will agree that Bussey on the Swinton lad was a very surprising decision, for me it was a cheap shot not an attempt at "wrapping", but you are always going to get differences of opinion. Plenty of Fev fans, for instance, are up in arms that the late shot/shoulder charge by a Leigh player on Martyn Ridyard which saw him forced from the field immediately and set for what may be a lengthy spell on the sidelines was worthy of a ban, but I don't think the incident was even discussed at the disciplinary....I'm sure some Fax fans saw the Hock challenge on Will Sharp at the Summer Bash differently to how the disciplinary saw it as another example.

Let's face it, the one thing that seems to unite us on these incidents is that the disciplinary committee is biased against our own team. There is a massive amount of "whataboutism" from fans of most clubs when one of their players are banned.

I think the bans are about right for the Leigh lads but it does seem some get away with murder compared to other teams,another example was gaz hock against hull..yes he through a punch and got 1 game ban but Griffin through 2 and not games same as Dixon against Warrington through his head and a punch no ban

Those are easy to explain - both were found guilty of Grade A punching, which carries a ban of 0-1 games. The RFL rules clearly indicated that Hock got the higher end of that grading (ie 1 game ban) because of having a smiliar offence at Grade C or above in the last 24 months, whereas Griffin didn't and didn't have 2 or more offences during the last 24 months, so got the lower end of the grading ie 0 games. Dixon also was found guilty of Grade A punching but like Griffin had no similar offence at Grade C or above & no two offences during the last 24 months, so again got 0 games.

I see that QLT and Maher are in the Cas squad for their visit to Warrington. Having said that, Maher was down as a non-playing squad member in Cas's last Friday's match even though he was also named (and played) in Fax's squad at Batley. Can they do that?

Cas have also recalled Mitch Clark so Fev's potential banana skin at Dewsbury looks a bit more slippery.

I've no complaint about the Leigh bans, PH - and they could have even got off lightly, looking at the maximum tariff for the offences. Unfortunately, there does seem to be inconsistency in the punishment process. Lussick was yellow carded in the Warrington game, for "foul and abusive language to a match official." Verdict - sin binning sufficient punishment. I know Dawson used 'foul and abusive language and - importantly - accused Kendall of 'cheating'. However, I would be interested to know the different gradings of 'foul and abusive language'!



One of the bad elements creeping into our game, is the verbal abuse of match officials, (e.g. Dawson v Leeds, and McCrone v Warrington) and it has to be stamped out. I just hope that Dawson's is not an isolated punishment.

As an aside, Ben Reynolds received a letter of caution from the Leeds game, for pointing a finger at a touch judge. There's just no hiding place when the Sky cameras are around!

From a Fax perspective the one that comes to mind from last years 8’s was Greg Bird on Ben Heaton who was lifted almost vertical and driven into the pitch head first with only his arm giving any sort of protection.
Bird got 2 games (I thought but was actually 4) reduced to 3 on appeal.

It was actually 4 matches reduced to 3 (which allowed him to play in the MPG), but it was a real bad one...

Well done Sparky

My post corrected and as you say looked a lot worse than most others I have seen.

Quote ="Alan"I've no complaint about the Leigh bans, PH - and they could have even got off lightly, looking at the maximum tariff for the offences. Unfortunately, there does seem to be inconsistency in the punishment process. Lussick was yellow carded in the Warrington game, for "foul and abusive language to a match official." Verdict - sin binning sufficient punishment. I know Dawson used 'foul and abusive language and - importantly - accused Kendall of 'cheating'. However, I would be interested to know the different gradings of 'foul and abusive language'! One of the bad elements creeping into our game, is the verbal abuse of match officials, (e.g. Dawson v Leeds, and McCrone v Warrington) and it has to be stamped out. I just hope that Dawson's is not an isolated punishment. As an aside, Ben Reynolds received a letter of caution from the Leeds game, for pointing a finger at a touch judge. There's just no hiding place when the Sky cameras are around! '" The fact that Lussick only received a Grade A citing suggests that it must have been at the minor end of the scale of offensive/obscene language and more importantly not targetted at the ref. The scales are A-C foul or abusive language B-D foul or abusive language targetted towards a match official B-F questioning the integrity of a match official To be honest I'm not quite sure how you would question the integrity of a match official and still only receive a Grade B citing, but those are the scales anyway. I guess they reflect the severity of the incident, probably starting at a "FFS" type comment for a Grade A to "you cheating b..." towards the upper end of the scale. www.rugby-league.com/operational ... 018/#p=378

Quote ="Alan"I've no complaint about the Leigh bans, PH - and they could have even got off lightly, looking at the maximum tariff for the offences. Unfortunately, there does seem to be inconsistency in the punishment process. Lussick was yellow carded in the Warrington game, for "foul and abusive language to a match official." Verdict - sin binning sufficient punishment. I know Dawson used 'foul and abusive language and - importantly - accused Kendall of 'cheating'. However, I would be interested to know the different gradings of 'foul and abusive language'! One of the bad elements creeping into our game, is the verbal abuse of match officials, (e.g. Dawson v Leeds, and McCrone v Warrington) and it has to be stamped out. I just hope that Dawson's is not an isolated punishment. As an aside, Ben Reynolds received a letter of caution from the Leeds game, for pointing a finger at a touch judge. There's just no hiding place when the Sky cameras are around! '" The fact that Lussick only received a Grade A citing suggests that it must have been at the minor end of the scale of offensive/obscene language and more importantly not targetted at the ref. The scales are A-C foul or abusive language B-D foul or abusive language targetted towards a match official B-F questioning the integrity of a match official To be honest I'm not quite sure how you would question the integrity of a match official and still only receive a Grade B citing, but those are the scales anyway. I guess they reflect the severity of the incident, probably starting at a "FFS" type comment for a Grade A to "you cheating b..." towards the upper end of the scale. www.rugby-league.com/operational ... 018/#p=378