I believe that the RFL were reviewing Cobb's performance (seriously) last week (hence he had no Challenge Cup game) and once this was reviewed Betts' comments would be reviewed.

I 100% expect him to get fined for it.

Cobb was never going to be a match official in the challenge cup anyway, he had some other commitments outside of the game which the RFL granted.

'The fact that Moore ran in on the Ah Van tackle (when no one else actually reacted including the officials' - the RFL reacted and gave Ah Van a 5 match ban, so of all the people on the field SM was the only one correct because he saw something (perhaps not reacting in the correct way, but many players push players off in similar incidents and 'get away with it'). I'll exclude Gibson from 'all people on the field' as I feel that he was in no position to take part in the referendum, but perhaps the anguish on his face may have given a clue as to which way he would have voted.

'then took Ah Van's head off' -the RFL seem to disagree with your version:

'No intent to injure the opponent. It is believed first contact was around the shoulder area' (can't see why he got a ban after they said this).
As for 'people at fault', what about your own 'fans' on social media who were basically blaming Gibson for injuring himself in the 'tackle' with PAV!

As other posters have said, it means a lot to WT if Moore is banned ie loss of one of our pivotal players (similar to when Brown does not play for Widnes) and who gains from that? - the teams around them in the table eg ............ Widnes.

Apologies in advance if I've got confused and any of the foregoing is incorrect, but I'm knocking on a bit (ie inclined to drop balls now and then).

I was at a junior game down at Bellevue the other week, and was talking to a chap who knows you and he said something on the same lines

IF he is PROVEN to be guilty then nobody can be blamed for that except Scott Moore himself, and I for one would be very seriously disappointed in any player found to be doing anything so despicable.

What I was trying to say was if the original video was "carefully viewed" for the original citation and the result was "the tribunal feel that the player did throw at least one punch" and "The exact nature and force of the punches cannot be clarified from the DVD footage" then how can they expect the same DVD footage to PROVE any gouging.

Even the most myopic of fans should be able to see the problem there!

If he is found guilty, then Michael Carter/Chris Chester should be asking to see the exact point in the DVD where that evidence exists - without that he has to be found not guilty.

Seems some Widnes fans see themselves as judge, jury and excutionor, yet the England assistant coach says she 12 yo daughter can ref better than Mr Cobb, what a advert for our game

What time are we likely to know the outcome ?

Not being heard until 17th May :0 lost for words

Quote ="djcool"Not being heard until 17th May :0 lost for words'" www.rugby-league.com/article/374 ... g-schedule

Quote ="djcool"Not being heard until 17th May :0 lost for words'" www.rugby-league.com/article/374 ... g-schedule

If Moore is found guilty on solid evidence where you can actually see him commit the foul, I will fully support whatever ban he is given.

BUT

The timing is very suspicious.
The lack of action on Denis Betts is suspicious.
And the match highlights do not provide any clear view of the alleged incident - again there is a lot doubt.

If Moore has a charge to answer, so should Heremia.
It's Heremia that makes first contact with the face area and leads to both players grabbing near the face, like you do when you grab someone by top of the shirt.
In the hustle and bustle of players running in, it's easy for a grab at the shirt to go wrong.

It's a joke to be honest. Agree that if Moore is proven to have done it, then he deserves his ban, horrible thing to do.

Not really much to add other than it's bizarre how this conveniently appears 10 days later, then isn't heard for another 10 days after that. Meanwhile Heremaia, who was sat on top of Moore laying into him plays on...

Oh and for the Widnes fan chelping up - check out your own supporters reaction to Ah Vans yellow before you come with the "conspiracy nutjobs" line.

Completely agree with everything above. The only thing I can think of is further evidence of gouging has come to light since the disciplinary hearing? The lack of action against Denis Betts is not only astonishing but very inconsistent and unprofessional of the RFL in my opinion and creates a precedent for appeals from other coaches who make inappriate comments about referees...

Was 19th minute the tackle on gibson, or after moores tackle on ah van?

I thought that was about the time both were sent off

If it's when they both got sent off, they must have good eyes.
The only thing you can really see, is after White lays into Moore, they have a scuffle and White is stood up looking a bit confused but at no point touches his eyes.

I think Dennis Betts' mum must have spotted the incident on her mobile phone video after the match and shown it to her lad.

So you believe everything the RFL come out with?

Are you being deliberately obtuse??

Actually Brain Carney released the statement for cob via the renegade guys podcast.

It states 19 minutes and on Heremia. Likewise i cant see anything under that pile of bodies.

Can't be true, no one knows me, I am the master of disguise, I am the Scarlet Pi .......... oh no I ain't


It's a fair cop guv

MC just said on twittrr: for once Im throwing some money at proper legal defence.Sick&tired of the MRP &it will make me feel better when we still lose

Don't blame MC the whole thing doesn't ring true with the time this has taken to come to light.

I am led to understand that Widnes DID report this. When and how I am not sure.

This may be the reason the MRP have gone back to the incident.

If he's gouged, deliberately, then he deserves a ban, but I agree with others, that no player deliberately damages an opponents eyes.

I would think that MC and SM would believe there is no offence if MC is throwing money at a defence strategy. Maybe Hudgell can help out, as it's his line of business and there's no love lost between him and the RFL.