Missed the game and the tackle however its annoying at present too many forwards are trying to be misters going in with shoulder shots or arms into the chest trying to knock them off there feet. When it goes wrong or a player side steps its seems ok when there nose is stuck to the tackling players forerm

and we say well he aimed for his chest! You take the chance, take the punishment!!

All teams have them and dont get me wrong its great when they come off but i much prefer the good old fashioned tackling by the legs! You cant run without them.. Girlfriends Dad has watched last 2 matches and has never been before but he's constantly saying get his bloody legs! I confess i hadnt noticed as much due to always watching but he's right tackle the bloody legs and were happy!!

If the legs fail when a 6ft 4 19stone bloke is running at you, poke them in the eye with some S**t!! What happens if there isnt any?? Dont worry there will be

Thought it was a definite red card for Ablett and yet again Bailey shows he is a thug. Interesting to see how many games they get (I don't think any) as its the semis next week.

Tomkins does have an awkward, all over the place style and always contests the collision, which can make for messy looking tackles; that said, I don't like this 'body-check' tackle style that's increasingly being employed, particularly against blokes kicking or catching the ball.

Either way, Ablett performed a 'body-check' with a raised forearm, so he deserved to walk; Ganson bottled it, his assistants bottled it and Red Hall will no doubt issue a slap on the wrist, which seems to be the standard punishment for Leeds players. Bailey will no doubt get the same for kneeing someone in the knackers.

The Coley incident was harsh, but since he's a vicious thug most of the time, you can't help but conclude that he walked partly because of his reputation - if it looks like a high tackle and Coley is involved, it probably is a high tackle. Occam's Razor kind of thing.

as far as i am concerned, he was looking straight at the man, focused with intent and a leading elbow / forearm which smashed in to the jaw..well webb has been doing it since he came over here so no change there the ! please whino's do NOT defend you make yourselves look very stupid..as for coley !! ganson needs to take a long look at that performance..well done wigan for not rising to what leeds tried to drag you down to

Mate I have watched it again, and for me it was a deliberate attack on Tomkins. He has no focus on the ball at all and leads into the tackle with him elbow raised to make the first contact.

I am not sure how you can try to defend the challenge, it was a very bad one without doubt.

I do not blame Ganson for not showing red, his touch judges bottled it for me not Ganson.

Korkidas wouldn't be able to get close enough!

In fairness red hall do sometimes (though rarely) give leeds players bans, they usually are reduced to a fine on appeal afterwards though.

I dont think it was deliberate but it was seriously reckless and deserves 3-4 games (as would probably happen in the nrl) but will probaly only get 1-2 tops. With regards to Ganson i have always wondered why refs call for a play to be put on report when the whole game is in affect being scrutinised by the rfl anyway. That young lad Childs (i think) seems confident in his own convictions and calls a lot of things on the field. Good on him. A SL standard ref should be able to call stuff like the Ablett thing and give the appropriate punishment ie red card on the field. I dont like the report system because it allows English refs to send anything to the RFL to look at on tuesday that should be dealt with on the field. The report system should be used for the borderline stuff and when the ref was unsighted. Not the serious stuff.

Firstly, I am not defending Ablett's challenge, I have said already that had Ablett got a Red or Yellow on the night I would have no complaints but what we are now talking about is whether it was with malice or intent and therefore should be punished with a suspension. He hit Tomkins in the face with his arm so it was an illegal tackle and you can't defend any illegal play, intentional or not and I am not trying to. However, does he deserve a lengthy ban, a short ban or a warning?

You say it was a deliberate attack on Tomkins, do you mean by that, that you think Ablett deliberately intended to hit Tomkins in the face and it was premeditated and with malice? I think Ablett was 100% deliberate in his intentions to put the big hit on Tomkins as soon as he caught the ball, he intended to body check/barge him over and not tackle him in the traditional sense however, that is not illegal. What happened is he ended up making contact with his head, this is illegal, intentional or not. Some will say it was poor timing, a split second later and Tomkins would have probably being back stood to his full height again and Ablett would have contacted with his chest, some will say a poor read, well of course he would be bending at the knees, stumbling forward as he caught the ball, Ablett should have read this and not tried to make a body check tackle in the first place and some, like you appear to be saying that he knew he was going to hit him the face and that was his clear intention? The first two better explain it the for me and I really do think that the final one does not, he does not seem to have any malicious intention to purposefully take Tomkins in the head as far as I am concerned, as I have said before, this is the key.

We know that the video review and disciplinary committee's rarely view these particular types of incidents in slow-motion, preferring to watch all the angles but over and over again at full speed. Why? Because slow-motion distorts the viewers perception of timing, you watch that in slow-mo and it looks nasty and brutal, watch it at full speed and just see how quick the whole thing is over. Ablett clearly lines Tomkins up, he has decided to take him with a body check as soon as he is able after Tomkins has taken the ball and his feet have hit the ground, but in the following split second (and it is less than a second) Tomkins is still low as he catches the ball at full tilt (lets face it, Tomkins has balls the size of small planets and never takes his eyes off the ball and is 100% committed to taking the ball at full tilt to turn defence into attack) and Ablett raises his arms, but only to chest height, and catches Tomkins in the head.

This happens, it is Rugby, it is a contact sport, and players will get things wrong and make wrong decisions BUT did he intend to hit Tomkins in the head, I really do doubt it watching it at full speed and given Ablett's previous record.

Despite asking the question several times, what is the difference in style and intent between McGuire's body check/tackle on Fielden, which Stevo was wetting his pants over in his usual over emphatic style and Ablett's body check/tackle?

What will be interesting will be the wording in the review and disciplinary committee's reports, lets see if they agree with you or me... he might still get a ban for a poor read and/or poor timing but will they agree he intended to do it?

Slow it down, speed it up, show it at normal speed whichever it still looks like the intention was to put Tomkins out of the game through fair means or foul. He must have had a good idea he was offside for a start and an equally good idea about where he was likely to make contact. His behaviour in attempting to 'rough' Tomkns up just a few tackles later tells me more about his 'character' than his 'previous record'. For me it was an intentional cheap shot and a deliberate attempt to put a quality player out of the game. Only Mr Ablett knows the truth but he doesn't come out of it looking too clever.

I think it was a deliberate attack yes.

Ablett would have had more than a good idea he was offside, he had an age to get the correct body position to make this "big hit" yet he still lead with the arm, the treatment Tomkins got throughout was one of a team sent out to target a player.

All this barge nonsense is just that nonsense in my opinion. He had so much time to get his body position right yet he still lead with the arm raised high. I feel he knew exactly what he was doing. He showed no attempt to play the ball when it was in the air, he set off to cause harm in my opinion.

Regards the Maguire incident not re watched it so i cannot comment, but I will bet he did not have 30 or 40 yards to run prior to making contact with his arm/elbow raised at a players head.

At best terrible technique, but I feel there was more to it than that taken in the context of the game.

Well the review panels job is to decide if the tackle was Careless, Reckless or Intentional or none of them and we will know that outcome today, so that will tell us both if they agree with me, you or neither of us!

jonh - Sorry mate, they agree with me although I expected a Careless or Reckless grade B and not Reckless grade C!



He will get not get the full 3 because of his previous excellent record, so my money is on a suspension now but he could still get a £300 fine only, but I expect 1, possibly 2 but not 3.

IA .. i enjoy reading most of your posts and the 1 earlier clearly stated the facts in your opinion but he clearly led with the elbow and that can never be called a body check..(unless it's on a cas player, that becomes a fair attempt !

)

Formal warning for Bailey for raised knees what a laugh the disciplinary commitee are!!! What they going to give Ablett a pat on the back , tea and scones and a sorry for wasting your time and taxi fare home!!!!!!!!!

This seems to crop up quite a few times when suspensions are handed out,how many times do you have to get caught before your record becomes blemished enough to count against you?When does a record stop being excellent and players finally get what they deserve?

For me Baileys raise of the knee was worse than Abletts forearm. Ablett could be excused for being clumsy, ill timed etc, Baileys knee was a deliberate attack with intent to cause harm to the defender. Shocking decision by the rfl but they do have a semi to play and are carrying injuries so they must be feeling sorry for the Rhinos and wanting to keep the game as evenly matched as possible.

Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"jonh - Sorry mate, they agree with me although I expected a Careless or Reckless grade B and not Reckless grade C! He will get not get the full 3 because of his previous excellent record, so my money is on a suspension now but he could still get a £300 fine only, but I expect 1, possibly 2 but not 3.'" 3 it is www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html

Quote ="Inflatable_Armadillo"jonh - Sorry mate, they agree with me although I expected a Careless or Reckless grade B and not Reckless grade C! He will get not get the full 3 because of his previous excellent record, so my money is on a suspension now but he could still get a £300 fine only, but I expect 1, possibly 2 but not 3.'" 3 it is www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html

Right call for me and according the sportinglife the ban is for "recklessly striking with the forearm" which is the correct call for me although I still feel he was very lucky to not be charged with a dangerous tackle.

I love all this faux outrage and chelping from you lot.
Surely you'd be best advised worrying about how your promising start to the season has imploded into farce or how your coach has been applying for other jobs or maybe just maybe you should be more concerned about how your SL franchise is hanging by a thread??
Good to hear we are hated of course all this and the conspiracy at Red hall bollox just adds up to poxy jealousy from insecure fans of a club in decline.
Shame really i quite like Wakey and JK and a great pitch which will look good in the Championship next year.

YYYYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWNNNNNNNNNNNNN!
poor likkle whino! one of your beatches got banned its about bloody time!!!

WTF has that got to do with fans of tin pot clubs whose very SL future is at risk chelping about it?




Sad pathetic ikkle Wakey pleb has nothing better to do than gloat about a ban eveyone was expecting!
Any conspiracy theories or Ref petitions this week?

Conversely, what exactly has the potical way that WTW is run got to with the disciplinary sanction issued to a Leeds Rhino's player?

You can't have it both ways flower; lolz, rofl etc.

Who's having it both ways the thread is about my club is it not?
It should be more of a concern to a Wakey fan exactly what's happening to his club should it not rather than whether a Rhino player gets banned or not.
I find it amusing given the current situation at your club that threads like this pop up with the jealous and pathetic bile that's posted on them.
I know if my club were in sh#t street,getting tw#tt*d every week ,had a coach applying for other jobs and was on verge of getting hoofed out of SL the last thing on my mind would be whether or not a player of our successfull neighbours got banned.

The bans been issued, case closed.