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.

I actually don't think Lee's tackle was that bad. Having watched him play for years, thats how he tackles. He plants his feet and swings his shoulder/arm (usually into the chest) obviously he got this very wrong this time. But I don't share the view it was malicious. Also, Briers on the replay seemed to look for the ref before closing his eyes and dropping the ball. As we saw with Rinaldi, once your hit, you're out.

I don't want to get a hammering, I am ambivolent to the incident so have no axe to grind except my own opinion. Anything that has not been reviewed by the disciplinary this season is pretty pointless because there is new direction and objectives each season as well as rules and modifications.

So, I think this is a test case for the 2012 season to see how this is going to be viewed. This will become the precedent as opposed to there being previous presidents to hold this up against.

The guess work will be over by the time we have our corn flakes tomorrow.

I hope you're wrong

Unless something new has been introduced about this type of tackle then previous decisions are entirely relevant.

Didn't Clark say in his commentary that "you cannot do that no more" ? . I've not been aware of any changes myself.

Which means you can

No he said, but you are allowed to shoulder charge. It did sound odd the way he said it and i can understand if people took it the wrong way.

Check YT sam moa big hit and you clearly hear what Clarke says.

I feel pretty confident in saying that he will get a ban and for the simple reason that he does not play for the big 4.

Personally, it was a fair hit and feel if it hadn't been on sky and the Lee incident wasn't fresh, then it wouldn't have gone any further.

Hit his shoulder then followed through to his head as he ducked/fell to the floor, and it wasn't reckless, it was a great hit.

he said "you can't do that in rugby league but in rugby union you can"

Try again