We dont need to pretend, the action Smith did was clearly an action which increased his leverage.

Or you dont punch people in the face then give them a facial cause it is likely to cause said player to lash out in self-protection. If you or your team-mate get caught then you dont really have a complaint. Also i didnt say he had no idea whose face is near is feet, im not sure why you have tried to attribute that quote to me, its probably because you know how much nonsense you are talking, i said he kicked somebody he had no way of seeing, the inference there being that he didnt know anyone was there, not that he knew someone was there but didnt know their identity. Your strawman is ridiculous.

at Smokey.

Self-protection indeed. Cos players never take the odd crack to the noggin in the tackle, do they? Deary me.

Carry on, you're looking almost as desperate as your coach last night.

Sorry are you saying that players have no need to ever protect themselves because they take the odd crack to the noggin? What an odd thing to infer.

Pretending for a moment that that's true, he did so recklessly in a way that could have caused a serious facial injury to another player. He didn't just kick out, he connect with another player's face!


I thought he did it for leverage. Make your mind up with this fantasy and stick to it please.


Hahahahahaha, if a player kicks you in the face you have every right to complain!




It's the same point you imbecile: you don't kick your legs out if you can't see if anyone is near your feet! Watching you dig this hole while you try to justify one of your players kicking another in the face is almost as entertaining as last night's demolition. Please don't stop.

Smith was on the end of high tackle and trying to get up was accidental, tomlins intentional kick that's the difference

Yes you muppet. Players take all sorts of shots in the tackle and 99% don't kick out. Oh, and kicking out at a random player he couldn't see isn't protecting yourself.

Anyway, crack on, loving your desperation.

Smokey can be a really good poster, but when it comes to do with Leeds his standards completely change.

Retaliation isn't excusable. It's understandable, but to make excuses for it (leverage being the worst one) is laughable at best and sad at worst. Tyson got sent off for retaliation last week and banned. A player punched him in the head for no reason. Lee Smith copped a reckless tackle (happens in contact sports) and a facial (which happens a lot). Both are against the rules and should be punished, but that doesn't mean he can take the law into his own hands and wreck less kick out at anyone.

You know this. Had it been any team but Leeds, you'd be saying the same thing. But you just can't bring yourself to criticise them when they're in the wrong (and before you say it, that doesn't mean Wigan were in the right). Discipline is a HUGE problem at the club. Making excuses will not fix the problem.

Smokey is way too busy slagging off Tomkins [url=http://viewtopic.php?p=16937710&tsmp=1338637502#p16937710[uHERE[/u[/url to be worrying about Lee Smith's leverage issues

Smith didnt know that at the time Kn*b all he knew was someone ie carmont had tried to rearrange his face, and oh what angels wigan are ffs.

what a strange justification.

I actually didnt say that it was retaliation, i said it was an attempt to get out of the position he was in, having copped a reckless tackle (which as you say happens) and whilst in the process of receiving a facial (which also happens) Smith flails his legs about to try and get out of the position he was in (which also happens a lot)

I dont think he kicked out at anyone i think he kicked out in general to get out of the position he was in, i dont think he had any idea finch was there considering he had someone on his face. I dont think any of it was anything which doesn't happen in every game and i doubt it would have been brought up had it not been a Wigan fan trying to deflect criticism of Tomkins from doing something different.

awww, you have come on another thread to try and get back up. Thats sweet

Smith had just been tackled around the legs by Finch. As soon as Finch's grip loosens he kicks his foot up in the air and into Finch's face. If he doesn't know that a player's face might be in the vicinity of his feet after a tackle around the legs and actually thinks it's safe to kick out like that then he needs removing from the game for a few weeks for the safety of his fellow professionals. By far the worst incident in the match, nothing else that happened compares to booting your opponent in the face.

So basically Tomkins' kick out was intentional and malicious whilst Smith's offence was entirely accidental? Nothing to do with the colour of their shirts of course.

Ahem...


Sounds like retaliation to me, but that's not surprising seeing as you'll change your argument however many times is required to defend Lee Smith and maintain the fantasy that Tomkins is the only player to have done any wrong, ever.


Doing something different? Both players kicked out but you've criticised one and defended the other, that's all I was pointing out.

Both of the players who kicked out during the tackle should face censure; Tomkins looked marginally worse at the time, since he was fully sighted and appeared to deliberately kick upwards towards the face, but both were reckless and dangerous.

I thought it was rather ironic that Finch spent half the game throwing himself on the floor to 'win' a penalty yet when he copped a boot to the face, stayed standing; if he'd have done a Danny McGuire possum routine, he may have got more out of the situation.

Neither should face a ban if the disciplinary committee are consistent though.

[urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?1954[/url

The big difference in the disclipine of the 2 sides appeared in the 2nd half when Leeds & Wigan both knocked on in quick succession.

JJB looked at the Ref like he'd caused the greatest injustice of all time and started flapping his arms around, when he'd dropped the ball. Lima knocked on moments later and just shrugged it off and accepted responsibility.

Judging by some comments from Leeds fans, they agree with you (but not necessarily for the same reason).

I noticed this as well. It summed Leeds' attitude to me. Everything they do is fine, and everything anyone else does is wrong. Apparently it's rubbed off on a lot of their fans.

I think that sums it up nicely.

It's sheer hypocrisy. But it's Leeds, so it was obvious that a Smokey comment wouldn't be consistent. Take Leeds out of the equation and Smokey usually has very good views.

Oddly enough I've just been watching an old game and spotted this incident www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?698 Smokey should note the wording breached his duty to other players"

Oddly enough I've just been watching an old game and spotted this incident www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?698 Smokey should note the wording breached his duty to other players"

Quote ="TheElectricGlidingWarrior"Oddly enough I've just been watching an old game and spotted this incident www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?698 Smokey should note the wording: "in lashing out in the manner he did [he breached his duty to other players"'" I think it's fair to say that since Maguire's tenure, 'duty to other players' is an outdated concept at Wigan.

Quote ="TheElectricGlidingWarrior"Oddly enough I've just been watching an old game and spotted this incident www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?698 Smokey should note the wording: "in lashing out in the manner he did [he breached his duty to other players"'" I think it's fair to say that since Maguire's tenure, 'duty to other players' is an outdated concept at Wigan.

Lee Smith kicks player in face for at least the second time and Wigan come in for criticism. You need to sort your obsession out mate.

In the interest of fairness I've just watched Tomkins kicking out in 2009, so looks like they both have previous. www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?996

In the interest of fairness I've just watched Tomkins kicking out in 2009, so looks like they both have previous. www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?996