It was pretty petty of Ganson. But it will do Tomkins no harm.

Of course next time I see Briers or Wellens (as two of the most obvious) start screeching, I expect them to get the same; somehow I doubt they will.

Have we ever made such a big deal out of a small thing before

Usually every day on here.

Well theres nothing wrong with ranting on about Noble or the team and signings but seriously this is silly.

Ganson lost it big style, his attitude was disgraceful for a so called "professional" sports official.Do you ever see any similar behaviour in any other sport?
It's Ganson who should be looked at for bringing the game into disrepute, stick to slanging matches over the garden fence, it's just your level.
He is just a Bully Boy who commands zero respect.

or complaining about a charity auction....

I'm surprised no-one has managed to turn this into a 'Sack Noble for not giving the correct training on how to speak to a match official' thread yet

Poor decision from Ganson imo.

Ganson sent sam off for the thumb gesture pure and simple..and thats from the horses mouth after the game!....does anyone think he would have sent long off if he did the same thing?

DaveO got owned.

Jeez guys, this is mean't to be a Wigan RL forum.

All this "points scoring" is getting boring. It's getting to be a pain to sift through it all to read the Wigan RL related points.


I know I am guilty at times, but will genuinely make an effort not to get sucked into these personal arguments going forward. Let's try and keep it on topic.


Or I will have to go on making up new words

Trust me (really), if Sam had a grin on his face when he told you - he's having you on!

It was a TKO

Seemed very serious to me.

If it's in doubt then he's stupid to have done it.

My interpretation of what happened after watching the recording a few times:

1. Sam holds up his arms to appeal for something (knock on I think) - understandable reaction by Sam but wrong
2. Sam continues the appealing far too long - Very wrong by Sam, he should know by now that he is going to lose and possibly end up in trouble
3. Ganson stops the clock at calls Sam over - Ganson correct to put Sam right but possibly an over reaction, maybe should have done it on the hoof but we didn't hear the previous conversation between them both
4. Ganson tells Sam who is in charge and after Sam tries to tell Ganson what he wanted to get across, Ganson tells Sam he isn't interested. - Again correct by Ganson
5. Sam seems to accept this and walks away says OK and puts his thumb up - Correct by Sam but should have accepted this earlier.
6. Ganson yellow cards him and says something like "I do the talking here" - This looked wrong to me, Ganson possibly misinterptreted what Sam said or fully expected that the conversation has already ended and anything else Sam said was therefore out of order.

Sam was wrong and got a lesson that he should already have known that you cannot win with the referee (unless your name is Lee Briers). It cost the team about 5 minutes at the end of a game that was already won but it could have had more impact in another tighter game.

Ganson was basically right but went too far, I think he lost his cool over something and nothing but perhaps can also learn a lesson about being less of a showman, I think the final act of this little episode didn't reflect too well on him.

All in all a small incident that got blown out of all proportion because of the human attributes we all have. Let's move on, bigger issues have happened in the past on the field and will happen again in the future.

And you do? Anyone with an ounce of common sense would not be daft enough to suggest he was being antagonistic.

Have you read Nobles comment on this by they way?

"But he actually got sin-binned for putting his thumb up. I don't think that was disrespectful - I think he was agreeing with the referee. I don't think he said anything."

[urlhttp://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=rleague/09/07/03/RUGBYL_Wigan_Quotes.html[/url



For once I agree with Brian Noble. You don't and you also don't know what was said but act as if you are dealing with facts.



Who said he should not? The point of debate was whether Ganson binned him for the thumbs up and moving away or not.



You have not got any facts to stick to. You do not know what was said.

Just to remind you what our coach thinks:

"But he actually got sin-binned for putting his thumb up. I don't think that was disrespectful - I think he was agreeing with the referee. I don't think he said anything."

I agree that this is what most likely occurred. You on the other hand are prepared to go off on one based on what? Absolutely nothing.

You seem to have no trouble and classing your opinion as a fact. Do you know what was said? No ,yet you are happy to draw a conclusion as if you are dealing with facts.



The penny seems to be finally dropping. It's called having an opinion and unlike you I am prepared to quality what I said and not assume. You on the other hand spout on as if you were stood next to the two of them.

You should try the "if" word yourself more often especially in situations when you don't know was said, like here.



Like the rest of your post you have that wrong as well. What facts have you posted about the "thumbs up" and Ganson's reaction to it? None as far as I can see. You just have an opinion.



Neither do you so you need to "get a grip". At least you are starting to talk about your opinion rather than "facts". Yes I disagree because I believe based on what I saw my conclusion is more likely to be correct than yours. It's called common sense.


And you need to take a step back and count to 10 before writing such drivel just because someone disagrees with your fact-less opinion.

You entire point if view is based on "purely speculative and totally unfounded comments."

Are you going to be in touch with Nobby telling him to get a grip for his "purely speculative and totally unfounded comments."?

Dave

Mr Ganson was at Haydock on Saturday.

Was going to go over and ask him for his eyes coz he sees things that others dont and normally to his personal advantage

Noble's comments are not relevant to the original point in debate, nor will having him stand your corner make you any more right. Unlike you, I have never claimed to have the faintest idea what may have been said. And I am stating facts, you're stating conjecture.

Does the O in your name stand for Obstreperous?



I am still sticking to my original FACTS, which you don't seem to understand or are choosing to ignore. Ganson wsn't going to change his mind and Sam should have walked away after the original decision.

As for Nobby's quote, again irrelevent to the original post and the FACTS but nice try in getting it to look like your both singing off the same him sheet.



Totally irrlevent to our 'debate' and the original post. Ganson wasn't going to reverse the original penalty and Sam should have walked away without a word the first time. Your clutching at straws. If you wish to check back on the thread, you'll find it was you who went off on one.



At no point have I assumed/presumed/hinted/claimed to know what either party said or even what they or their body language may have said, unlike you. The FACT remains, since my first post, that Sam should have walked away after the original penalty.



And you won't see any because as I stated in my last post, nobody knows what was said. Without that evidence, the actions are irrelevent.



The difference is, I have stated from the off that nobody knows what was said. However, you have based the callous nature of Ganson's decision and the 'holier than thou' posts and attitude of some people on what you think you saw. I hope your never a juror!



Wrong again (unsurprisingly). Firstly, the only speculative drivel on this thread is from yourself, simply trying to twist what other posters have written, or being to challenegd to understand their view point.
Secondly, my point of view since the start of this thread remains unchanged. Nobody on here, yourself included knows what was said by either party and the FACTS are:
-Sam shouldn't have said anything after the original penalty.
-Ganson was never going to change his mind, regardless of whatever Sam has to say.



Why would I? He is defending his player, as any coach should. He hasn't jumped onto a thread on a message board calling people holier than thou and getting his knickers in a twist. Unlike yourself.

What is it that you cannot grasp about the FACTS that (one mor time just for you):

- Ganson was not going to change the orignal penalty decision regardless of anything Sam was going to say.
- When the original penalty went to Quins, Sam should have walked away.

Those are the FACTS I have stated throughout this thread. At no point, unlike you, have I claimed to know what any words or gestures passed between Sam and Ganson and what they may have meant.

Sort yourself out, you keep trying to move the goalposts and throwing in irrelevent material. You're going to make a fool of yourself.

Of course they are relevant. The point I made was Ganson made a mistake to send him off for thumbs up and that was nothing to be thankful for. You do not learn lessons for being punished for stuff you didn't do.



No one is disputing Sam should not have talked back to the ref. What I am saying which you choose to ignore is that Ganson, IMO, sin binned him for the thumbs up, which is something Noble agrees with.



It is completely relevant to the point I made.



I suggest you check the thread and read my post again. Nowhere in it does it say or suggest Sam was right to talk back because that was not the point of the post. The point was all about why Ganson sin binned him and plenty of people including the coach think he did so for the thumbs up gesture. The fact Ganson was not going to change his original decisions is what is irrelevant because that wasn't the point of the post.



The facts are simply these:

Ganson gave a penalty, Sam talked back to Ganson and Ganson gave 10m. He did not sin bin Sam at this point.

Ganson then said something else to Sam who turned away and gave the thumbs up. Ganson then called him back and sin binned him.

Noble has claimed Sam was acknowledging the referee not being disrespectful.

Those are the facts. I do not think sin binning a player who his coach believes did nothing wrong is something to start a thread about praising the ref.

It is obvious to any sensible person Sam was sin binned for the thumbs up gesture. He has already started to move away and Nobles interpreation of events is one I believe to be most sensible. So what you are actually on about I have no idea.



I have actually done that and was foreman for one of two trials as well



I base my opinion n what actually happened. He sin binned him for the thumbs up, so Ganson got it wrong and IMO should not be thanked for his actions.



Which has nothing to do with why Ganson sin binned him.



Both of which are irrelevant to the point I made.

You need to look at the title of the thread you started, thanking Ganson for sin binning Sam. I am saying there is no thanks due for sin binning a player who has just acknowledged the ref is right.



So why did he sin bin him then? If you have no idea why did you start a thread thanking the ref for sin binning a player?



The only person doing that is you starting with this sentence "I'd like to say a big thanks to Steve Ganson for sin-binning Sam on Friday night. "

What a stupid position to take given he sin binned him for walking away.

Dave

I thought he sinbinned him for putting his thumb up?

i know....but by posting that way i thought the modern generation might understand a bit better.

and stop being pedantic

wil you answer the question....i want to know what thw word means





mmmmmmmmmmmm

I thought Ganson called him over told him off Sam sarcastically nodded and put his thumbs up and then mentioned something along the lines of "Just because your favourite team has lost tonight".

Then he got binned. Sam needs to learn to keep it quiet, but who knows if the game was a tight match Sam may have shut up, but the game was well won. Not saying i condone giving away silly penalties etc because you can afford to.

Either way Gansons a right fat numpty and i think good on you Sam.

Sorry sir. Just trying to help.