Agree with that

A guy on Rovers forum has made a topic to claim it was a "clear attempt to injure Atkin". I honestly don't know how some people manage to think up these claims.

In farness, he lined him to properly batter him and was unfortunate to follow through with his shoulder to the head. In contact sports, a lot of big hits are meant to hurt, stops you coming back for more. Jewitt on the other hand did deliberately try to damage players and got away scot free, even after close up shots of him forearming Griifin in the face several times. Ludicrous.

Yeah agree he wanted to hurt him. Every player is trying to hurt the ball carrier in every tackle, but there's a difference between hurt and injure.
If anybody thinks Faraimo purposely set out to hit Atkin in the head and injure him they're just been ridiculous.

watched it a few times now, yellow at worst. If he doesn't gete S.O.S then it's a con. If he was in Yellow and Blue there would only have been a penalty.

The worst bit is if it wasn't on sky their wouldn't have even been a penalty.

true, ref didn't see it, lines(whater they're called now) didn't see it. It was just a solid hit.

Why such an inexperienced referee was given the game is beyond any reason, for both teams.

Thing is, they don't apply the rules consistently. I could take it if, when we see a similar tackle taking place, we see the same decision being made.
We all know though that we'll see a carbon copy tackle next week involving a different team and they'll just award a penalty.

Thought the Dobbins got away with plenty yesterday, but listening to Phil Clarke, Hull got all the decisions. Never heard from him for the last 15 minutes though . Must have been sat in a corner sulking.

Yeh John Wells put Clark right at the end when he was so P*ssed off with him downing us all the time that he said something like , "Right Phil lets give credit where credit is due"

Clarke was willing Rovers on to win. Wells was pretty fair I thought.

Yeah, I normally quite like Wells and get a little wound up by Clarke.

But yesterday, I wanted to sup on Wells’ tears so badly. From a Rovers POV, his cheerleading for you was close to nauseating. His excitement at Talanoa lifting his fingers off the touchline before grounding the ball (once you’ve touched the line, the play is dead Jon - and this lot still can’t be bothered to spell your name correctly, despite your desperate attempts ingratiate yourself. So there.)

I thought you weren't that bothered about it.

My expectations were low, I said I wasn’t nervous and I told PCollinson that everybody can define what it means to them for themselves. Not sure I said I wasn’t bothered?



Between the sending off and you going ahead 6-18 I was a bit nervous, and there was a brief flicker at 12-18 too. But we don’t carry much threat and without Lunt and McGuire we are a bit directionless too.

Without the sending off, it’d have been a 20+ margin, i’m sure. That would have been shizzle too, if closer to what i’d prepared myself for.

I'm always prepared for a massive defeat. Anything else is a bonus after the scars of 4 years of Agar.

Last year decisions had been published by early afternoon.

Nothing yet - so maybe they've decided that banning players during a 2 day turnover of games was not such a good idea.

Don't think it's a sending off as I said on the match thread but if players were to bend their backs a bit more when making tackles this would rarely ever be an issue.

Spoke too soon, they did meet.

Bureta Faraimo (Hull FC) - Grade B High tackle - 1 Match Penalty Notice

(whatever that might mean.)

Grasping at straws but does he have an EGP or is that even a thing now?

Watts got a "3 match penalty notice", so I guess he's out of the game on Monday.

Would rather he serve it against Wakey than Saints tbh, so better than expected.

Don't think so. 1 is the lower end of grade B in any case. There is the opportunity for an appeal but that carries risks as well as possible reward.

Everyone seems to have an opinion on this one I spoke to a rovers fan this morning who said it was never a red card, I believe it was, it was clumsy and a poor technique the arm was coming around but after the fact, he also seemed to change his angle of attack just before leaving the ground and went in at a higher angle, which made it look far worse than it would of otherwise. I would love refs to be consistent but we also need to consistent in our expectations, if we cant decide whats a red and whats not we are never going to be happy with the referees decision. There was no intent to cause harm IMO but it could easily have done as much damage as the one he was on the receiving end of against Warrington if he had him a few inches higher.

My understanding is that it’s at the lower end of the scale because he has no previous so it carries a 1 match ban.
What perplexes me is that if he was sent off in the 78th minute then he still has that 1 game ban.
He was sent off after 9 mins so has already served that 1 match. If that’s not the case he’s got nearly 2 games ban.

so radford going to appeal then? he stated he would in the after match interview if faraimo was punished more

With one game I wouldn't. If the appeal isn't uccessful, then you get the full punishment for that grade of offence, so he would end up with 2 matches.

Would sooner see him fresh for Friday with a point to prove.