JAMIE ACTON - LEIGH
LEIGH V WAKEFIELD - SUPER LEAGUE
RANGE OF RECOMMENDED SANCTIONS IN RELATION TO CHARGED GRADE* :

1-2

DETAILS OF CHARGE / REASON FOR NF :

Rule – 15.1(i) Detail – Dangerous Contact - A defending player, in effecting a tackle, makes dangerous contact (either direct or indirect) with the supporting leg or legs of an attacking player who is being held in the tackle by a defender(s), and who is deemed to be in a vulnerable position, in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player.

DECISION:

Charge

INCIDENT:

Dangerous Contact in the 72nd minute (Fifita)

Why is Acton's 1-2 matches for same charge ?

GIL DUDSON - WIDNES
WIDNES V HULL FC - SUPER LEAGUE
RANGE OF RECOMMENDED SANCTIONS IN RELATION TO CHARGED GRADE* :

NFA-1

DETAILS OF CHARGE / REASON FOR NF :

Rule – 15.1(i) Detail – Detail – Dangerous Contact - A defending player, in effecting a tackle, makes dangerous contact (either direct or indirect) with the supporting leg or legs of an attacking player who is being held in the tackle by a defender(s), and who is deemed to be in a vulnerable position, in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player. Grade – A

DECISION:

Charge

INCIDENT:

Dangerous Contact in the 58th minute (Kelly)

Just goes to show how the speed of the hand can deceive the eye! Here was me (and the Trinity fans) thinking that Acton had made contact with Fifita's [size=150=#FF0000arm/shoulder[/size?!



Obviously, it's a separate incident. he got away with the chicken wing tackle - but has been done for a chicken leg one!!

JAMIE ACTON - LEIGH
LEIGH V WAKEFIELD - SUPER LEAGUE
DETAILS OF CHARGE / REASON FOR NF :

Player enters tackle in order to complete tackle on opponent who attempts to fend player. Player releases arm and then re-grips arm as opponent is taken to ground. Footage inconclusive as to whether any pressure is applied.

DECISION:

No charge

INCIDENT:

Dangerous Contact in the 28th minute (Fifita)

Isn't it interesting that last week nobody was up at the disciplinary on the same week the ' top ' clubs had players on International duty ? , would Saints have been happy sending Walmsley all the way to OZ if Walker had got a ban for punching pellissiaia ?

I have to admit that I am not a fan of the kind of tackle that Jamie is being charged with. There is undoubtedly the potential for injury. Of course, you could argue that there is potential for injury in every single tackle in every single game - it's a very hard game.

What is a defending player supposed to do, when his team mates are attempting to tackle a player who won't go down? They are coached to bring that player down, just as the attacking player is coached to stay up! It's an extremely fine line, between the tackle being 'legal' (withing the RFL definition of the word) and 'illegal' (within that same definition) At the speed the game is being played, the tackler just hasn't got time to think of the best 'legal' way to effect that tackle. Also, a player who is on the pitch for say 60 minutes, is twice as likely to make an 'illegal' tackle, than one who is there for say 30 minutes. If Acton is told by his coaches, not to play as physically, his effectiveness is removed. He's a big, fit, mobile lad - those are his strengths and they have to be fully utilised.

Previously, Acton has infuriated me. Whilst recognising his abilities, he has ruined it all by the silly wind-up tactics he has used - like patting opponents on the head, and all too readily getting involved, where he shouldn't. This season, he is being done for incorrect technique - when, as I maintain, technique is a very fine line in a hard game, played at speed.

It's difficult to shy away from the opinion that he is being 'watched' in the disciplinary process. (FOUR matches for pushing an opponent last season!?) Three players have been cited for 'dangerous contact' in last week's SL games. That means that the other 201 players who participated, didn't effect any 'dangerous contact' at all. Really?!?! Frankly, within the RFL definitions of 'dangerous contact' I find that impossible to believe. Just how closely are members of the review panel watching every minute of each single game?

By all means, let's caution players about their technique - but let's do it to all of them, not just single out a handful of them.

Great post Al,Spot on.

Walker threw a punch but was not cited,would someone please explain why not.If it had been Hock or Acton they would have been looking at least 3/5 matches ban,or did Pelissier head butt Walkers hand

Quote ="propforward 2338"Walker threw a punch but was not cited,would someone please explain why not.If it had been Hock or Acton they would have been looking at least 3/5 matches ban,or did Pelissier head butt Walkers hand'" Walker was cited for a Grade A punching offence, carrying a punishment of 0-1 match. He possibly used an EGP to escape a ban. www.rugby-league.com/the_rfl/dis ... #advSearch

Quote ="propforward 2338"Walker threw a punch but was not cited,would someone please explain why not.If it had been Hock or Acton they would have been looking at least 3/5 matches ban,or did Pelissier head butt Walkers hand'" Walker was cited for a Grade A punching offence, carrying a punishment of 0-1 match. He possibly used an EGP to escape a ban. www.rugby-league.com/the_rfl/dis ... #advSearch

We again see irregularity in certain areas of the game. I’ve seen Referees (more senior ones) this season call “held” as soon as momentum is stopped stood up with many fans and pundits calling it not tackled.

It is a thin line but we are not in a sport where we can throw the towel in to make the Referees decision for him/her. It’s down to the referee’s judgement.

Some in my eyes are basically calling it too late and the reason these citing’s come about. The more senior referees tend to call it early (rightly or wrongly) which eradicates situations as above and keeps the game flowing.

Most of these fast-tracked Referees need to go back to the classroom and learn the basic fundamentals of the game again. That way we cut out inconsistency in all departments.

1 game ban for Acton

Disgusting.

The RFL are totally against Leigh.

Hes really cleaned his game up this season now hes getting charged for nothing

I agree.

I agree,They're are an incompetent corrupt joke.

Spot on

And Brough only gets 2 match ban for TWO far worse challenges.

Most corrupt outfit in rugby league . Absolute bunch of morons that are making some idiotic decisions every week. At least make it less obvious that you have favourites. Acton gets man of the match then gets banned!! Joke the lot if ya !!

Russ Bridge on the panel - there's a blast from the past! www.rugby-league.com/article/400 ... ers-banned

Russ Bridge on the panel - there's a blast from the past! www.rugby-league.com/article/400 ... ers-banned

Think you need a lie down, the guy was awesome then got it wrong - not sure how you relate the 2

He earned the man of the match award but also earned his ban.

I thought the RFL were quite lenient with him. Could easily have been 2 games looking at the footage.

Also very lenient with Danny Brough. Like I've said, there's a very fine line between what's 'legal' and what isn't . At pace, there's not much time to ensure getting it right. I'm still surprised so few players get charged!

I wouldn't suggest any bias by the Disciplinary - like you say, they've been lenient. I'd love to know how closely the review panel watch every minute of every game! Perhaps Acton and Brough need to become less physically 'obvious'!

I've said many times he gets unfair treatment from the RFL. He takes a lot of punishment too but just gets on with it! After the Salford match he had a real shiner on his cheek, he didn't get that from 'playing the ball' !!
I was annoyed at Saints to see Percival tackle Higson around the head, Higson looked to be 'knocked out' before hitting the ground and, subsequently released the ball. The Medics came on treated Adam and, the decision was? Knock on

Saints won the scrum and scored from it

I wonder what Jaimie would have got on the Pitch or, review?
Jaimie is a Future international, definitely, I just hope we offer him the deal to stay with us?
Can't wait to see Maria back and taking the ball in with Jaimie and Hock, that should lift the rest of team also!!

I don't get the "RFL have it in for us" that gets spouted. Every ban that he has got has been justified. I know it is difficult to take the rose tinted glasses of when it is our club, but we have to just dust ourselves down and get on with it. The majority of the negativity that surround the club emanates from fans. Remember, negativity breeds negativity. The more our fans spout it the more it will affect the players confidence. The coaching staff haven't created a siege mentality against the RFL the fans have. The coaches are trying to build the lads' confidence but it will be difficult when they are surrounded by all this negativity.

They are trying damned hard to improve Jamies discipline, but people blaming everyone but Jamie is making the coaches job harder.