It was an elbow to the back of Bird's head.

split his head apparently - had to go off for stitches

Video was on on Twitter - its a bad one.

Edit - but some Leeds fans are saying Turgut's was worse

No, it simply wasn't clear.
Clear would have said
Received 2 match ban, 4 games in and 3 players have received bans, it was lazy writing and ambiguous hence why I asked for clarification, that's not being pedantic in the slightest, it's simply asking a poster to clarify what they meant.

Whilst I agree it could've been written better, a simple Google would've given you the answer you were seeking therefore emitting the need for the sarcastic post. Everyone else knew what Jake meant. This constant bickering between you and several others is getting very tedious and if you all can't just ignore each other and crack on, then bans will start to be given.

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.

2015 no red cards, four yellow
2016 no red cards, one yellow

Hardly cause for concern.

Not many of those this season. You didn't mention how many players and how many games suspensions in previous seasons though.

This is yet another thing that's improved over Radford's tenure to date. Maybe Radford's turning us in to a top 4 club has meant the RFL are more lenient, who knows?

Looking at the disciplinary list of charged "hull" players, it's surprising how many rovers players actually crop up.
I don't think we come out too badly - Watts, Taylor, Kelly and Paea are in there, and one or two others.



I didn't realise we're now a dirty side - best not go anymore.

But the Rovers Rejects now playing for you are being coached with the Radford tackling technique.

Point taken though, Wigan play dirty and win stuff so why not Hull? I just think you can expect an average of 1 suspension a game until it gets sorted. You'll run out of EGPs and suspensions will be longer. Still.....if it works in terms of league position, bully for you (pun intended).

Don't talk rubbish, Radford has been in charge for 3 years, in that time we have been pretty good discipline wise, this season we have been a bit dumb that's all, nothing to do with coaching, maybe a bit of over enthusiasm and the will to win.

Just looked last season we have the least yellow and red cards in the league.

Supporter of a team with Cockayne in it trying to educate us on discipline.

The world has gone crazy.

Inconvenient.

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.

I posted it on a phone so posted what was clear to anyone with an IQ of 10 or above. I'll bear the rest of you in mind next time

How did we do ban wise against everyone else last year?

I wonder what happens if personal, nasty name-calling is directed at other people, like hard-working coaching staff for example?

Nothing, the mods sit on their hands unless some blubbering baby goes crying to them

I've been banned from Rovers board for about 5 years. They can't handle the truth, which, given their current reality, is probably a good thing.

No. You called him a ****wit. Enough. Just ignore each other as this is really quite childish now.

Well if it means we have the best defence in the league, then Radford's school of tackling is fine with me.

Not necessarily about Turgut but there's an interesting comment from Ralf Rimmer of the RFL in a Q&A on Twitter this afternoon.

@Red_Devil878
Why is the disciplinary panel so inconsistent?

@TheRFL
RR: We aim to be consistent. Currently there is an independent review into our judicial process with four clubs (HKR, Hull, Oldham & Wakey).

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.