[url=http://www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/4858McManus issues club statement about Travis Burns injury challenge[/url

He has a point IMO. Without wanting to make this thread entirely about the challenge, it was as bad as it gets in both intent and injury. The farcical on field officials bottled it and the even more farcical review system failed to pick up a proper ban for it. I thought the Grand Final incident and the ban it brought might signal a proper approach to dangerous challenges, but apparently not. It's toss a coin time over such matters still. The RFL will no doubt respond to this with a fine for McManus and ignore the obvious issues.

It's also quite likely to bite Saints on the bum. The next borderline challenge from Saints will no doubt be met with an exaggerated response in a mard retaliation to this statement being issued. It's very interesting that McManus has gone public with this, particularly just before the derby with Wigan. A derby we're going to have to turn into a dour forward battle if we're to avoid being slaughtered given our injury mess again.

Bell whiff what is the point of you... Jog on back to Yawnion.

Saints have had some scandalous decisions in their favour against Catalans, Wakefield and HKR. Didn't hear a peep out of him then. Needs to wind his neck in.

Is there a bit of a difference perhaps between a forward pass and a triple fracture of the cheekbone?

He's right about the disciplinaries and off field sanctions they MUST be consistent.

As for refs, they're human, they'll miss things, get it wrong and make mistakes thats why the above is VITAL!

This isn't about Saints and being 'hard done to'.

Its clearly a point raised about the disciplinary process and officiating standards in GENERAL. There is also the addition of how player welfare is paramount and the current disciplinary seems to be ignoring it.

Please focus the discussion around the above as that is the issue raised. The whole 'yeah well your club got these calls' debate is boring.

He's right off field sanctions must be consistent. So no favours for the bigger clubs then.
Saints have had more than their share of 50/50 calls going their way this season already.

Hudgell,did the same and got caned by the RFL . Would expect the same for McManus.

The thing that bothers me the most, is that aswell as a late tackle these tackles are almost every time shoulder charges aswell. This means it's two offences at the same time and also they are very intentional and very dangerous. Taking all that into account I don't see how they can justify just awarding a penalty. It's not going to stop unless they clamp down and start dishing out the red cards consistently.

Remind me, which dangerous play / disciplinary decisions in our favour were scandalous in those games?

McManus is spot on. If that statement had been released jointly by all chairman to remove reference to and bias for/against saints, everyone would agree with every word.

Funny you mention the Wakey game, as we saw in that game a great example of the inconsistency of the game. Jon Wilkin was rightly penalised for a late challenge on the Wakey player yet 2 minutes later Mark Flanagan gets a shoulder in the face from Lautititi (and a serious facial injury) and nothing was mentioned about it.

You're probably right, and maybe if Mr McManus and a few of the other chairman had backed Neil Hudgell when he spoke out against the disciplinary system not being fit for purpose last year we'd maybe have got somewhere as a united force. But he didn't as saints were obviously getting the rub of the green whereas now this matter affects them. The disciplinary system is a farce, some refereeing performances are ruining the game but its not just started happening!!

On this occasion the ref missed the incident, it was picked up and Green got a two match ban. I don't think Mr McManus would've been shouting so loud had the boot been on the other foot. Think your players truly are going to have to be saints now thanks to his outburst

2 years ago saints came to Craven Park in a cup game with the a game plan that was basically a guide to heaqd hunting. Dobson was smashed left right and centre with shoulder charges and head high tackles. This culminated with Meli clothes lining Craig Hall to the extent where it shocked me it didn't break his neck. Ok Meli walked, but we could easily have been playing against 10 men by that point. Never heard a peep from McManus condemning his players or coach. Did he get in a pulpit and apologise to the Rugby world, nope he kept quiet.

McManus is a typical NIMBY, complain when its about his club otherwise he'll stay schtum, The ref / disciplinary debate fired off last year, it was surrounding the Mickey Paea banning for a leg charge which he rightly got banned for yet there were another 3 or 4 instances the same week that went unpunished. If I remember rightly Pearson at Hull kicked off, this was backed by Hudgell and the wakefield coach, McManus kept quiet but as has been said it didn't suit his agenda

I trust his players will be whiter than white in the derby, otherwise some egg on face might be the order of the day.

Saints were the grubbiest team to have played Wakefield this season.
Wilkin got away with 3 head shots and Wellens also got away with a trip and we wont even get into the wrestling stuff on the ground.
So, in reply to the op, no sympathy from here whatsoever,
If they clean up their general play, there wont be any bans coming.

Saints are the new Wigan, a definite change in playing style which has helped them win games when playing poorly, just as Wigan managed last season.
May be it's a "Lancashire" thing ?

I think we ought to forget his obvious Saints bias in his examples, and look at it across the board, the process SHOULD be thorough, and above all consistent.

Refs will make mistakes and sometimes won't see what happened, this can all be corrected by a set of off field procedues, providing they are FAIR, THOROUGH and CONSISTENT.

He might have a point. That he chooses only to illustrate it with examples where he feels his team has been badly done to does him no favours though.

No one is saying Saints are angels, if we're committing serious fouls and not being punished they should be, just further evidence that the system isn't working. What he wants is consistency and a disciplinary system that protects players. There is IMO a clear line between an intended outcome and an accidental one and the RFL don't have any grasp on the severity of incidents IMO. In this instance Green used an outlawed technique to deliberately attack the skull of a player in a vulnerable position, causing a triple fracture of his cheek bone. Do we really have to wait until someone dies or suffers a life changing injury before something is done about it? A 6 game ban in this instance would be a deterrent to players. It's not a normal high shot like you compare it to, those are more often than not accidental or reckless. As for the Wakefield v Saints game, the worst challenge was Lauitiiti's, also a shoulder charge to the face which also caused serious injury. Green is only going to miss 1 game for this, which is a joke. Surely you can see that?

Flanagan ran face first into the chest of Lauitiiti, there was no shoulder involved!

Don't fall for Cunninghams "woe with us" press statement, spin and warping of the truth!

Exactly that; I see this in disciplinary cases in my professional life all the time - someone is before the beak for a misdemeanour and all of a sudden, they want to blow the whistle on years worth of malpractice that has happened before their very eyes, but which they never felt the need to report until their own job is on the line.

For what it's worth, I agree with most of what he's said, but it's meaningless for each individual coach or chairman to bleat about these things when their own club appears badly done to - surely they have some forum in which to collectively let the RFL know that they're unhappy with the inconsistent application of the rules, without club bias or risking a large fine and the wrath of the officials for the coming few weeks?

Perhaps the dialogue behind closed door is ignored and people feel the need to speak out in public? Note, McManus is not the first, nor will he be the last, nor is it the first time he has raised these same concerns.

The last time McManus raised these concerns, by the way, was after lifting the Super League trophy. Was that sour grapes too, because it was only champagne flowing at that time!

Also, the very fact that you say saints could suffer at the hands of refs/disciplinary for having the temerity to make a statement serves only to support a suspicion that the system is flawed/inconsistent/corrupt.

I can agree with most of what you are saying, BUT if he feels so strongly about a flawed disciplinary system why did he not back up our chairman and Hull FC's chairman, both who were fined for their very similar outbursts last year. I'm afraid it comes across as not in my back yard because of his comments purely about St Helens being hard done by.

Always had the upmost respect for your club and thought our two clubs shared a pretty good relationship, afraid this statement has disappointed me, not for it's content but for it's poor timing.

(Still hope you beat Wigan tomorrow though

)

Indeed, it’s one thing allowing a try from a dodgy offside, it’s quite another when a player makes a deliberate attack to the head of another.

After the Ah Van incident Green should have been given the red card, but the referee bottled it, so did the disciplinary, it should have been a Grade D offence IMO.

Lord McManus is spot on.

Regards

King James

I wonder how vocal he'll be when one of his own players do it, especially that useless lump of cack Masoe.