The whole system is ridiculous though, because how can it be Sending off sufficient .....sufficient for what, when there's no mention of foul play?

Richard Silverwood just agreed that they could have said "No charge on-field decision incorrect!" At least that would have been an attempt to gain some respect back!!

So they don't charge him they're wrong, and if they charge him they're wrong. Gee.

The only Wigan incident reported in the disciplinary summaries is the the Sean O’Loughlin late tackle on Sneyd in the 2nd minute.

I've been trying to get my head round that as well. It sounds like you can be sent off for accidental/unintentional contact with the head.

No, the RFL create situation where they are indefensible, and most RL fans are sick of it!

As I added just now to my above post

Richard Silverwood just agreed that they could have said "No charge on-field decision incorrect!" because by what they have said it was and at least that would have been an attempt to gain some respect back!!

... just looking again, the decision is "charge", and the outcome is "Sending off Sufficient".


Sounds like sending off is always a "charge".
Or, to put it another way, sending off has never ended up with "no charge, 'cos the ref got it wrong".

Didn't hear many saying that on the 26th August, despite many referres and ex players saying so.

Funny how we latch onto the disciplinary/what ex pros and refs and pundits have to say when it suits us.

The disciplinary doesn't charge Watts and it's the correct decision and proves that the red card was silly but when its a player playing for another team who gets the same it would be that they have no bottle (see the ridiciculous notion that he only wasn't banned so that they didn't have to ban Sean O'Loughlin...who has been banned before).

You can't possibly say that going down to 12 men cost you the game. It didn't against Cas. I've seen countless teams win with a player down.

.... if it's any consolation, I didn't think Clubb scored a try, it was a loose carry and he lost the ball.

In open play it would have been a knock on, and never mentioned again.

Neither did I, I bring it up as an example of how suddenly, all these ex-pros/refs/pundits saying Watts shouldn't have been sent off are correct but they weren't when they were all (including Lee Radford) saying it should have been given.

its all ifs and buts ,wigan should never have been in a position to score their last try at Wembley,should have been a drop out,instead of a 20m tap.you lost the main event .get over it.

They were wrong, simple.

Slightly more concerning to me about that game was that it was niggly all the way through and resulted in at least 3 "handbags" incidents and at least 3 warnings to the captains, [uand NO further action for any of it. [/u

Are they implying that everything was OK?

Our great game is in danger of being irreversibly damaged by referees. Whilst referees should be given respect both on and off the field for the difficult job they have in making the right decisions, their officiating is in danger of losing the professional edge and making the game a mockery for players and public alike. Too many prima-donna refs - both past and present - are lording it, both on and off the pitch, and spoiling the game. Accountability comes first. Get it sorted RFL. FC & Proud

Obviously not as stupid as you. flanders flings his arm back into connor's face resulting in him needing to leave the field for a head test. If it had happened to tomkins he'd still be rolling around on the KC pitch

I reckon ex-pros/refs views on foul play are worth listening to, but try/no try - they're like everyone else, simply giving an opinion like you or me.

Yet the only thing deemed not good by the panel is the first hit on Sneyd that they say could/should have been a penalty. I don't think the officials even saw it

but the video ref would have

watts should never have been sent off. His arm wasn't out anywhere near enough to have been a deliberate attempt to injure and the only reason the injury occurred was due mcillorum's gash tackling technique. If he'd hit him where he should then he wouldn't have been anywhere near watts' elbow. It's likely cost us 2 points but we dust off and move on. Hopefully we'll get to play wigan again this year with a near fit side and 13 men on the pitch so we can show them yet again who are the better team

Agree with the above, it was a chippy game from the opening tackle with McIlorum trying to drive Watts' head into the pitch followed in the same set the late hit on Sneyd (which non of the officials saw) and so the tone was set and continued. The fact the neither Connor, Tomkins, McIlorum, Kelly etc have not been named by the disciplinary with SO'L only getting one and Wigans only one, yet Griffin, Houghton and Watts is a concern. Then again the week before the St's v Wigan game was pretty chippy and again nothing brought up.

What is annoying and the reason why the fans of this sport are growing restless with the officials & the disciplinary is the way they cover up poor decisions/officiating and their explanation a prime example of ineptitude.

“Player carrying ball in and begins to change direction and brace for impact from defender who is approaching player at speed from the inside. Elbow and forearm of player are not promoted. Contact made between head of opponent and front of arm of opponent. Sending Off Sufficient,” the RFL stated on their website

1. The disciplinary panel admit the elbow/arm was not promoted by Watts.
2. Defender approaches with speed and from the inside.
3. The panel go on to say contact is made between head of opponent & front of arm of opponent.

Yet they deem sending of suffcient??? WTF!!!! If they admit as they clearly have Watts never promoted the elbow or arm then what offence has he committed other than being Liam Watts? So what is a player supposed to do in the situation? stick their hands behind their backs or play with cushions strapped to their arms?

The RFL would have gained much more credibility and respect had they said the above statement but with a summary of 'Incorrect intervention by VR and incorrect on field decision, red card rescinded'

Otherwise what they have now said is any defending player ballsing up their tackling technique and getting a whack on the bonce is the attacking players fault and will be classed as a red card offence.

I understand the need to safeguard players but the number of penalties and red/yellow cards being given for accidental/unfortunate contact with opponents' heads is getting ridiculous now. For me, unless there is a deliberate attempt to injure or a completely reckless challenge then there needs to be a better balance of who is at fault

Great news and common sense prevails.

Just hope we don't have Hicks on Thursday.

Assault?







Seriously, even a penalty for that would have been one of the softest the sport had ever seen. He goes for the charge down and barely brushes Sneyd. There is probably a fingertip of contact and you want him charged, yet Watts' raised elbow makes full contact with MM's jaw and knocks him out and cry that the RFL are picking on you? You lot are quickly making yourselves a laughing stock here. Give your heads a wobble.

You not read the RFL Disciplinary charge and summary I take it? guessing you haven't with the bit of your post I've highlighted in bold. If you had you would have noticed the panel have clearly stated that Watts arm or elbow were not 'promoted'. This confirms it was a bad decision to give a card and was McIlorums poor attempt at trying to put a big hit on Watts, in essence a bit like trying to go head on against a bus only riding a bike.

I've copied and pasted the RFL statement for you (sorry I don't have any pictures but it's not joined up writing so you should be ok)

“Player carrying ball in and begins to change direction and brace for impact from defender who is approaching player at speed from the inside. Elbow and forearm of player are not promoted. Contact made between head of opponent and front of arm of opponent. Sending Off Sufficient,” the RFL stated on their website