Quote="knockersbumpMKII"Again in English, he pleaded guilty, got that bit.
How many games is he banned for?
You stated got 2 matches, then 4 games, then 3 bans...which is it 2,3 or 4?'"
Quote="Jake the Peg"Just to be clear, I didn't insult anyone, I referred to anyone who couldn't understand what I posted as ****wits. If he took that personally then that's his issue.'"
No. You called him a ****wit. Enough. Just ignore each other as this is really quite childish now.
Quote="Gallanteer"Radford school of tackling. I posted this a couple of weeks ago. Hull need to sort this out sharpish before a) someone gets really hurt and b) it starts to affect your future results (can't believe I just typed that last bit). Ahem, no please, carry on I like the sound of point b.'"
Well if it means we have the best defence in the league, then Radford's school of tackling is fine with me.
I don't even think it's necessary to have everyone on the panel to be that have played the game. A basic understanding of physics/physiology and the difference between an actual choice to do X as opposed to X happening because of other factors that dictated the outcome.
Sliding in with knees to a defenceless player (scoring atry for instance) is a deliberate choice
A tackle that starts off below the shoulder but hits the head as the attacking players body drops (either through being tackled from behind/falling etc) but cannot physically adjust arms/body in a split second to avoid head contact is not 'reckless' or a deliberate choice.
people who can understand that Charging and handing out bans on outcomes i.e. how severe an injury is to a player is not fair or just.
A deliberate swinging arm/leg twist and the player gets up quickly should have far more of a punishment than what I described above where the player may be laid out.
Whilst we want to avoid contact to the head unfortunate incidents out of the control of the tackler in normal legal play should not be unduly punished otherwise no-one would ever attempt to make a tackle.
Intent is everything as it is in law but RFL disciplinary is a fooking shambles.
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
