Ive done a little digging around here and come up with this little bit of footage from a game between saints v leeds from 20.3.2009, now click on the link or might have to copy and paste and watch from 2.50

=#FF0000Sorry to be a spoilsport, but no YT links allowed. You may want to give a YT reference for people to look up.

Chris

now heres the decision from the disciplinary panel on this incident

Case Number

ON/130/09

Name

Ryan Bailey

Club

Leeds

Shirt Number

16

Match

St Helens v Leeds

Competition

Super League

Date

20/03/09

Incident considered

High tackle in 47th minute

Decision

No charge

Details of Charge / Reason for NF

Player does make contact with head of opponent, shoulder not elbow or forearm, not an illegal challenge, opponent dips into tackle


Now if bailey got off with that then there can be no way in the world sam moa should be banned, i suggest hull fc take this footage with them

I actually mentioned this on the Sam Moa thread. I completely agree with you.

Email the club, see if they think it's of interest. It's certainly a great argument.

Good spot

One question though (answer maybe elsewhere) - Have the rules changed since??

I think you're right - good find. You'll probably get an admonishment from a mod for a youtube link, but I doubt it'll be harshly worded.


No way MF 'dipped' into that collision, but if he did, then so did Rinaldi.
I'm not sure about the rule or the interpretation (head knocks aren't nice, toughest sport or not), but that is pretty much a perfect precedent.

There is also Morley on Harrison Hanson if you search it.

Case Number ON/67/10
Name Adrian Morley
Club Warrington
Shirt Number 8
Match Warrington v Wigan
Competition Super League
Date 20/02/10
Incident considered High tackle in 80th minute (Hansen)
Decision No charge
Details of Charge / Reason for NF Initial contact shoulder to shoulder, player’s opponent falling into challenge, no misconduct

Ive also noted it was a certain mr bentham refereeing that day.....the same mr bentham who was the video ref and although not certain im confident it was his intervention that got sam moa his red card

also love one of the reasons to let bailey off "Player does make contact with head of opponent"

i just cant recall fa`asavalu`s face covered in blood before that tackle was made

I just hope Hull fc have done there homework too mate

Same here mate will just have to wait and see.

who was the ref for this game above the one and only phil bentham and to think everyone in france thou he was a nice bloke

The hit Whelham made on Lynn in the friendly, was a very similar challenge, but done at more pace (obviously cos he was chasing the high ball) and that was play on, with no repercussions.
And quite rightly so, I believe.

He wasn`t the ref, he was the video ref, and if you mean 300 people as everyone then thats a pretty small percentage of hull fans who thought he was a nice guy

but like i said the sending off might not of being anything to do with him, who knows????

i meant the st helens v leeds on you tube

I posted the links to the Morley incident on the Sam Moa thread, both cases point to why big Sam should be available for selection next week. Had that game not been on sky, it would have been play on with only a stopage for the injured player.

No worries dude

The slight difference is that Moa probably meant to hit the shoulder, but missed and got him straight on the jaw instead. I don't think he meant to do it, but it was reckless.

go on the Tube of You and look at Rangi Chase V Sinfield from last year exactly the same kind of hit, what was the outcome of that? Not sure if it was even a penalty was it?

No the rules haven't changed.
Bailey plays for Leeds = No Charge
Sam plays for Hull =

As has been said by lots of posters already hits like those happen all the time and it's rarely even a penalty let alone a red card. If this gets anything other than a not guilty then it's a disgrace.

To me, that looks worse than the one Moa did...

That video clip of Bailey on Faasavalu (sp?) is very similar to the Moa on Rinaldi challenge. Both players go in to make the big hit and make unintentional contact with the head due to the ball-runner dipping in. If the Bailey occurance was given as 'no-charge' then the same should happen to Moa. As someone stated earlier, it's an almost perfect precedent.
Hopefully the club will bring this case up at Moa's disciplinary.

whatever happens it wont alter the fact that Silverwood and Bentham will have nothing done to them> Their incomptence which they show week after week will go unmentioned.I hope against hope that this incident should wake up everyone and make them sort these refs out. We pay bloody good money to watch a sport not a ref. Perhaps if they stopped coaching on the pitch and got on with reffing this problem wouldnt arise.

Jonathon Walker (Castleford) on Luke Burgess (Leeds) 13.8.10

Have a look at this incident on YT and tell me how this differs from Sam's case. Note the explanation as to the reason why Walker was not charged

Case Number ON/599/10
Name Jonathan Walker
Club Castleford
Shirt Number 31
Match Castleford v Leeds
Competition Super League
Date 13/08/10
Incident considered High tackle on Luke Burgess in 79th minute
Decision No charge
Details of Charge / Reason for NF Player used legal shoulder charge. Point of collision accidental

According to someone on Twitter, Tommy Lee has pleaded guilty and takena 2 match ban. Fair play to him if so, although I don't really think he had a case.

Shoulder was into the body, they then accidentally clashed heads.

Difference with Moa is that he did make contact with the head (with his shoulder), the issue is whether he hit the shoulder first then head, therefore intent will be nill and he may get sending off sufficient. If he has hit the head first they can still argue no intent due to Rinaldi's body position but depends on the panel.