Farcical outcome. Nothing personal against O'Laughlin or Wigan but had it been a Salford player it would have been 3 games guaranteed. Stuff it I'm no longer being a victim of this long running Koukash/RFL feud.

Both tackles demonstrate a typical high shot. A player being lunging out recklessly. I can't remember the last deliberately high shot I saw. They are all like that. The point is that as high shots go it was a bad one, that ended a player's season and robbed him of the chance to play at Wembley for his hometown club. Given Wakey's stature, it might be his only chance.

Had that tackle been on Super Sam, putting him out of action until 2017, the offending player would in no way have got 1 game. It doesn't affect me at all if O'Loughlin plays next week or not, Wigan won't play Wakey for a while yet and he's a penalty machine anyway. It's about the integrity of the process. Players are getting a lot more for a lot less, and one immediate problem with the system is that the offending player had two of his former teammates, two men he will have spent many, many hours with, professionally and socially, sitting on the three-man panel.

Like many things, the RFL makes a pigs ear of things. Things should be consistent and fair. They're not. Koukash probably has a point.

This is just one of a number of high shots that happen EVERY week. It got massive media attention, more-so because of who he is, rather than the actual offence, and it's given carte blanche to people to whinge about it, with preposterous claims of bias etc.
Tony Clubb has been injured, and had to have surgery because of a crusher tackle. That one went ignored, the player responsible got away with it, that team is now top of the league, and Clubb will miss more games than Annakin.
But don't let fairness get in the way of a good rant.

Discussion is never a bad thing, but the regular calls claiming the judicial process is "not fit for purpose" or alleging some manic inconsistency etc. are just ridiculous hyperbole.



See, you making such brash claims doesn't make them true. Of course it is fit for purpose. (which is not a claim that it is perfect, any more than I would claim the country's courts system is perfect). They just suffer from the scourge of every court or tribunal - someone has to make a decision, secure in the knowledge that at least half the audience will disagree with it, and the guarantee that a strident minority will always and by knee-jerk claim bias, conspiracy, etc etc. Except, of course, for those decisions (the overwhelming majority !!!!!!!!!!!) with which they have absolutely no issue, oddly enough.

The modern problem is that the minority to some extent have a voice, because of social media, but this doesn't make them any more than a small minority, however much noise and hyperbole they emit. Example: whenever they deal with a head shot case, it is 100% certain that after the event there will be 2 opposing factions
a) in support of the decision and
b) claiming it is the most ridiculous and bent decision EVVA
Now, it wouldn't make a jot of difference what disciplinary system you had, even if each case was investigated for 7 years by Chilcot, the same people will always say it was bent / ridiculous / and the most irritating "[iOffence X was EXACTLY the same as Fred Blogg's Offence Y, and HE only got Z matches etc etc etc[/i".

The simple (and indisputable) fact is that the process as it stands is eminently fair and reasonable, compliant with modern standards, and uncontroversially deals with thousands of cases every season. So even if there was an actual issue or problem in one case, that would have no bearing on the overall fitness for purpose whatsoever.

FFS you're being pathetic now - it's an absolute stinker, be a man and admit it.

I agree... He could have broken Hall's neck.

I wonder if Charnley gets a ban for deliberate contact with the ref. Saints and then a cup semi final to come. Are the RFL brave enough?

Nothing really in that, just think he was trying to get his attention and caught refs arm, that cannonball tackle is the real issue, a tackle freely employed by Wigen, time that was a straight yellow/red.

He didn't catch him. He deliberately knocked his arm away. If it was Hock or Bailey it would be a ban without question.

Hicks should be demoted for penalising Charnley for being barged off the ball by Briscoe in a try scoring position. And for not awarding a penalty for a high tackle in a kickable position when there was 2 points in the game. It's a conspiracy!

I'd have to watch that again but it looked to me as though he tackled him from the back rather than the side and I thought that made a difference. I could be wrong but isn't the whole point about attacking joints when you force the joint to go the wrong way rather than the right way, like hitting the side of a standing knee.

It's still unnecessary and dangerous. Should've been penalised at the time and might have discouraged the other attempts that followed in the game.

He should, but then lets look at all the other players who have done the same and explain why they didn't. I have seen Sinfield pull back the ref plenty of times over the years and yet, nothing.

No you haven't.

Definatly hasn't. Still think it was nothing from charnley just a ticking off.

That one tonight was a leg breaker by Tautai,lets see how many games he gets.

I thought the Leeds players reaction to it was justified could have caused a career ending injury, the problem was that the officials didn't show much concern to the incident.

Are Wigan people born stupid or do they become stupid - fascinating question.

Its not stupidity, I got a lot of time for fans in the Wigan area, spent a lot of time in Leigh......I dunno what it is, arrogance maybe, I dunno.

I[i can[/i picture the Wakey board though, if the same thing had happened between England or Moore and a n other of wigan, the board would be discussing how bad it looked and fearing the worst with regard to the length of the ban.
And when the worst arrived, they'd be blaming the players stupidity for the high shot and not being surprised he got 6 matches.
Not on the Wigan board though it seems, there's some special kind of f*ckwittedness going on in certain corners of that forum.

There are Wigan Fans and Wigoons unfortunately some of the the latter ones have been prominent on here lately.

The problem is the game's attitude to that type of tackle. It has the potential to seriously injure. But at the moment the powers that be don't really care. But then someone will eventually get a serious injury and then everyone will come on the player then that does that tackle.

It's not about wigan or the player that did the tackle last night but the games attitude toward it.

Unfortunately the sport did its usual. It clamped down on them fairly well at the beginning of the season. The suspensions handed out early in the season were fully justified and in my opinion there weren't enough of them. But then they forgot all about it. Same as every year with one issue or another.

Exactly, it's like they seem to cave in under some sort of pressure from somewhere that says the game must flow or let things slide. Well safety of the players is paramount and the game would flow if players weren't making mistakes and flouting the laws of the game/pushing it as far as they can get away with which is horrible to watch and slows the game down as a consequence of wanting to let the game flow.

Almost word for word what Brian Mac said - who was first, him or you?