Another laughable 'Charge'



It's quite clear he not only maintained pressure but increased it. I don't think he should of been banned, that would be way OTT (sin bin would of been about right mind...) but more is the problem, apparently the eyesight of the adjudicators at the RFL.

He only released it because he was about to get a smack from Joel. Yet again one rule for Wigan one rule for the rest.

around neck? since when has your neck been your nose and mouth?

The RFL is such a joke.

Exactly, it was across his face. What the hell was Jones-Buchanon trying to do anyway.

As I said here [urlhttp://viewtopic.php?t=421566[/url

Sinfield on Carmont was much worse and seems to have gone unnoticed.

Probably trying to make someone as ugly as he is.

My issue isn't really with the tackle (obviously it was a grapple) but the report. Following on from the cunningham mess last week, the RFL are showing just how inept they are.

Not humanly possible, nothing can replicate that forehead, with the possible exception of Frankenstein's monster.

The ref has a significant amount of blame for not controlling the situations. The joke about the JJB incident is that it seemed to last a mon's age, right in front of the ref.

Typical Bentham, he lets everything go until it kicks off, then has no idea how to resolve it.

'kin Peanut.

The RFL's disciplinary is a joke.

i personally can't belive sinfield got away with what he did to tomkins either, how he wasn't even brought before the disciplinary panel for pulling tomkins down by his genetalia is beyond me, normally when something similar happens it results in a 2 week ban iirc from last time

I don't think the Tomkins one was intentional. The one on Carmont certainly was.

TBF, as much as I really dislike Sinfield, I don't think that was intentional. It appeared to be an attempt to grab the shorts and drag him back and missed placed.

and if you watch closely his other arm came round so he could have both arms linked and exert more pressure.

the RFL are a joke

I noticed that as well and as a nuetual i thought it was a disgrace.

Are some people seriously saying it warranted anything other than a penalty?

I agree, it was a penalty nothing more.

In my opinion he could have done as much damage as some high tackles.

I agree, but ones that only warrant a penalty and nothing more.

Fair point.

But if he'd broken a nose, or crushed the jaw or eye socket, if he'd carried on with his 'tackling action', what would you want then?

The whole point being what actually happened while a penalty really was nothing more. We can't deal with ifs.

IF Coley's high tackle had broken someone's nose/jaw/eye socket what would you want then - etc.

I can't believe some are getting worked up by it - actually I can.