On the face of it the article is fine, the question is one that Clarke had caused himself in that would he be writing the same thing if a Wigan player had done that to a Leeds player? This comment from him about the Ben Flower incident trying to turn it into some sort of positive for the sport makes me think not....

And there is the issue-things he's said previously.

However, this article is fine. No issue with it at all.

The point about the crusher tackle in the sport is fine imo but he clearly makes it about Ferres which he claims not to.
Also Printer points out what a hypocrite he is & did PC do a similar article when Bateman only got 3 games for a crusher??

Honestly?

Yes, it would have taken the heat out of the argument.

How? The complaints are largely around the length of the ban and should we see much longer bans to stop these tackles happening. Leeds coming out saying Ferres has let the club down, teammates, himself etc. wouldn't have changed that.

Disagree mate PC is & always will be an attention seeking hypocrite irrespective if a Club Coach or Player speaks out.

Oh I have no doubt that the article would have appeared in some form or guise.

My "beef" as it were is its always sweep it under the carpet one minute, the next, decry it from the rooftops.

Yes McDermott will decry something from the rooftops.....when he's interviewed. As far as I recall he wasn't asked about the incident post match and hasn't been interviewed since (I imagine later today).

GH doesn't come out when it involves player bans for or against with the exception of the Hardaker 2nd homophobic case which is a much different issue.

Who here really would go out of their way to condemn their own player as soon as possible? I very much doubt you'd be running to the press first thing Monday morning to throw Ferres under the bus if you were in the coaching position.

I meant Clurky, sorry that wasn't the clearest thing Ive ever written

my bad.

However you are right. Thursday is our presser, he will be asked and I'm sure he will more than likely give a frank answer.

It's a shame Ferres has decided to appeal the decision. I thought he was a tad on the fortunate side to get 6 and should just have accepted that. Any apology now appears a little hollow in light of an appeal.

Hard heartedly I can see why he is.

Though IMO only, I agree with you.

McDermott has confirmed they won't be appealing the ban.

Fair enough, hadn't seen that.

I think it was important that he didn't appeal.

Thought that would be the case, noted that Ferres said HE was considering appealing, not the club. As well as carrying on the anger about the tackle it would've been a major surprise if they reduced it so completely pointless on that front too.

I completely agree

I know he pleaded guilty straight away, but appealed the grading (hoping for an E >D) before the hearing. I hadn't seen he was planning on appealing afterwards?

I assume the panel start in the middle of the range - 6 matches, then deducted one for early guilty plea, added one for serious injury caused and his prior disciplinary record was neither good enough for a reduction or severe enough for an additional match?

Hopefully Gildart makes a full recovery.
My only criticism of the incident was allowing him back on the field? For a player consistently complaining of neck pain, his neck can't be cleared without imaging. As far as I know, the only rugby stadium in the country with an Xray machine in the medical room is Twickenham....

The club have always previously said they never get involved in the decision to appeal. It's a player's right and a player's choice.

One other thing i note from Mc.D's interview he didn't openly hammer Ferres like he did Singleton wrt letting the Club down.

I noticed that too and wondered the difference

Hardly a hammering him by saying he let his teammates down. He also called him "one of most decent standup honest guys coming through the game"'and "cheap shots aren't what he's about".......but people ignore that part.

The difference is that Ferres wasn't a calculated act but careless at best. Singo's was a deliberate act. IMO

Spot on, it's because of the end result of the player on the receiving end in both instances that cloud people's judgement. Had Gildart been able to play on but Greg Bird stretched off then might change people's opinion.

Hang on Ferres has a duty of care just as Singleton did both equally as stupid & reckless as each other thats straight forward.
Both have incurred long bans which leave the Club short on numbers & both equally culpable for their actions.

First tackle up after a said to?


Ferres may not have intended to injure but he had a duty of care once he had Gildart in that position even if it was a split second just as Singleton had a split second to lower his forearm.