I know, but your comment sounded as though i was just saying it because it was a leeds player, which i wasn't, Senior hasn't been banned this time, that's done. But maybe something should be done before something worse happens. Yes they've been consistent in not banning any of those, but that doesn't mean it's right.

So presumably when it was Mathers and Tomkins you were moaning that they should have been banned?

Just checking if you have any credibility and consistency on the issue.

Thanks for that, I'd made up an alternative in my mind that while it fitted probably wasn't suitable for a family forum.



Do the RFL not have a duty to sanction the action rather than the result of the action?

I presume they viewed the incident as careless rather than wreckless, accidental contact rather than intentional contact.

Hence not applying the maximum penalty for the Grade A offence.

No i wasn't 'moaning' but i was surprised after Sam didn't get anything. Clearly not taking into account anything i've said, maybe try reading what i've said before trying to have a go with a smart comment. Kicking out may just be careless and no doubt that Senior didn't realise Joel was there from his reaction, btut if careless actions lead to injuries then something needs to be done about them doesn't it, so next time...

Ok, thanks for clearing that up: no consistency or credibility. Dirty Pretty Thing had you cock on.

Ah right, seeing as i've mae the same points in every post, i'd say that's consistent, as for credibility, what do you think this is? I thought it was just a forum where people post their opinions, so get over yourself. Nothing i've said is getting through your thick skull so, in a bit.

I highlighted the bit about kick to the head. When you phrase it like that you assume that the kick to the head was the intention and it was done carelessly - ie. a careless kick to the head. Senior was not kicking anyone in the head, he was doing what practically all player do in a game every tackle- moving his feet around to free of tacklers. If RL players went around kicking each other in the head then all the dire consequences you list may eventually happen (although perhaps not the ones from Hollywood films like getting their nose bones smashed into their brains). It was a penalty - end of.

Oh, and concussion is seldom a reason for a missed game. In Union it's an automatic 3 game rest. In League players are assessed and compared to their normal reactions - and I can't remember too many players ever missing a game because they were concussed the week before. You are also unlikely to get concussion from a stray boot. I've been knocked out by knees, shoulders but most often by the ground itself.

But what I don't understand (to those posters saying something needs to be done) is that something has been done .... this time.

Senior has had to front the full disciplinary panel to explain his actions and as a result he came away £300 lighter in his back pocket.

What more would you have liked to have seen for an accidental consequence of a careless action?

Let's wait and see what happens to the next player penalised for trying to regain his feet quickly to play the ball.



That's correct in the modern game.

The use of the cognitive test seems to have removed the mandatory absence that was once commonplace.

Its your hypocritical failure to make these points in the past when Wigan players were accused that is the issue not whether your whining has been consistent on this thread.

That lack of consistency removes any credibility your blubbing about Senior might otherwise have had.

Sorrycouldn't resist commenting back to this excuse for a comeback...
I wasn't on these boards when the last incidents happened...so how was a i supposed to make those points that would make me consistent?
i said i was shocked when Sam didn't get a ban when you asked about that, so hows that not being 'consistent' about it.

Just out of curiosity will you be posting these opinions when j.tompkins seriously hurts someone with his knees in the tackle as is becoming a trait of his ,or is it just "part of the game" like some of the other one eyed Pies think?

So, in summary, you're a one eyed hypocritical sh*t stirrer?

Thanks for the clarification.

If somebodies injured by it then i'm not likely to be singing his praises am i, i wouldn't defend him no, and i wouldn't have a go at somebody who came on slating him for it.
As for being a sh*t stirrer, what is this a school playground? The fact 'Puig-Aubert' that you think i'm one eyed after what i've said with regards to Tomkins kicking out and Coley's ban proves your stupidity.

I'd have thought your hypocrisy would easilly outweigh that.

I mean, when it was Mathers and Tomkins did you go around telling people how terrible it was that hey weren't banned?

Thought not.

you're awful attempt to take the p*ss is boring me now.Bye.

I'm not taking the p*ss.

I'm just exposing the hypocritcial lack of credibility with regards to your bleating about Senior. Its nothing personal.

No. It should be "stamped out" ASAP. It doesn't matter who does it.

Kicking out usually happens sideways, aimed at the ankles; this was an exceptional case, and beyond any doubt very dangerous. Pure and simple, he shouldn't have done it. THIS is why there is so much fuss being kicked up about it. It's against the rules, and players are supposed to know this, just the same as other dangerous tackles, inserting fingers into the anus, grabbing players by the testicles and other underhand techniques.

I've no doubt he didn't mean to kick anyone in the [iface[/i, but you can't say someone swinging their leg like that, without making any effort to find terra firma, didn't expect to feel something other than thin air on the other end!



And who in the name of holy hell has said that? NO-ONE. All should atone for their sins, whether they wear Cherry and White, Primrose and Blue or the Red Vee of Doom and Evil.



See above. I'm sure he didn't mean to kick someone in the face, but he intended to connect with someone. The ground was the other way, so don't say he was trying to regain his feet one foot at a time in the way a clown at Blackpool circus would.




I've no issue with that. Although he did raise himself up on a wall, he was celebrating a win in a hard and close fought match. I didn't see any offensive hand gestures, but if there were, then yes, they should be pulled up for it on the grounds RL is a family sport, but that would apply to all players of all teams.



As is the whole Senior debacle. It's not about the fact that a player had stitches as a result, it's that he could have been whiplashed, concussed, blinded, or worse. The potential for injury from Senior's kick was high. If the minimum penalty is no further action, what the hell do you have to do to get the one match ban? Actually kill someone?

That's in poor taste considering recent events.

tut-tut

Wear a big curly wig and you can probably get off from that as well.

Or just be called Mathers or Tomkins.

Ironic post given your name!

Not really.

Christ I thought our lot where a bit one eyed, you whinos really cant see how dangerous Seniors lash out was? He used a very large amount of force, far more than I've seen in a while in trying to get back to your feet & never in a month of Sundays do you kick that high in doing so!(it's all stomach muscles when you're on your back...lol)
It's codswallop that the RFL swallowed McClennans explanation, complete & utter nonsense, the fact is he still kicked out hard & high!

The RFL have really put their foot in it so to speak, they should admit they have made mistakes in the past & have done so again. They really need to think hard about the potential damage that metal studs can cause to the face/head when a forceful kick such as Seniors & others can do.
Certainly I've seen players been sent off for exactly that in the amateur game & rightly so, it also sends out completely the wrong signal to the young uns.

As has been mentioned already the risk factor of actual damage is very much higher with something like a kick out and is certainly a more deliberate act than a large majority of 'spear' tackles IMO