They say the "initial" contact was with the shoulder.
Of course he hit O'Brien's head, that was after the shoulder.
Scruton could also have pulled out of the "tackle".

Maybe they felt they had to come up with something up to stop themselves looking wassocks for charging him?

Good news, nevertheless. No firing squad on the quarterdeck this time.

The collective apoplexy from the relative few who were after blood (Not Nottingham Tiger; he has argued his case fairly and objectively) will soon die down.

Although a regular poster on this thread, I was never "after blood". I started the thread believing that the tackle made contact with O'Brien's head. This has been proven by the disciplinary panel and accepted by Scruton and Cummings. He was right to be found guilty of making contact with the head, but due to his previous record I think a fine is a fair punishment.

Where does state all this....I just checked RFL disciplinary pages and Scruton's case hasn't been updated yet. Not that I'm bothered with the outcome!

It's up on the bulls twitter feeds

www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... ban-stands

www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... ban-stands

And Sporting Life site.

What a complete joke the disciplinary is.
Ben Westwood plays the ball then walks five yard forward to have a go at Webb,gets one match, I'm no fan of Webbs, but what was he supposed to do, and he gets one game ban.leon drops his knees deliberately into someone's head and gets no ban cos he took early guilty plea
Of all four up before the beak this week Leon's was the worst and he ends up getting the least,he can't put in a guilty plea for 12 month,wow

For once I agree with you. Although, technically, this thread is about the Nick Scruton tackle. However, I appreciate that this is one of the few forums on this site you are not banned from.

Great news

Thanks for you edit, I was about to take offence!

In fact, you will see I updated my post before you posted your reply anyway (you must have been typing as I was doing so.) I was distracted by a cat jumping on the keyboard, and lost my train of thought since I had every intention of making that point as I was typing. My missus would say its more a case of increasing senior moments...

Having now watched it on replay several times, I can see no problem with the contact. Both players were fully committed to travelling in a collision path. The pass was made too late for either player to pull out.

Nottstiger did you get my PM

Appreciated anyway, I mainly use RL Fans to post on other boards (I have Casforum for Cas-related stuff). Living out of the RL heartlands it is one of the few means I have to discuss the game, and it's surprising how may others assume that you are posting on their board as a "troll" or such like. Definately not the case on here, where although I have held a different viewpoint to most I do feel like it has been a debate rather than a slanging match!

Not yet seen any formal confirmation that he was found guilty of making contact with O'Brien's head or of a high tackle - 'reckless' doesn't necessarily mean 'high' - so will wait to see the formal adjudication on the RFL site first. Have only seen that 'The panel deemed the initial contact to have been legal', and that the charge was downgraded from a Grade B to a Grade A offence (lowest level).

Well actually to be fair, you originally claimed that the Scruton tackle was as bad if not worse than the incident involving chase and 'wondered how many games he would get'.

But anyway the correct decision has been made in the end, although I bet Scruton wished he had got a yellow than than the £300 hit to his pocket!

Aaahh, wasn't on sportinglife when I looked. Know I'm five hours behind but didn't think it applied t' t'interweb too!

. Thanks.

I hadn't noticed it until you said, but have now replied.

Really, when did I say that?

On the original MoM thread.

From the Castleford MOM thread:




Nick Fozzard's certainly spitting his dummy out on Twitter. Another nitwit who seems to think that a single still image tells the full story - just as he did with one he found of Rangi Chase's challenge on Hardaker (which he seemed to think proved Chase was innocent of any wrongdoing, strangely enough).

Especially as you don't have a cat...

This was my comment on the Chase "tackle", you must be confusing me with another poster.

Ok, but the comment on the original MOM thread was made in the moment feeling frustrated at losing, having watched the game whilst drinking Stella. My views did change when these factors had worn off!