So we now ban people based on the severity of the injury rather than the act that caused it? In that case, Millington should have got at leaast 4 games last season when Campese was tackled and suffered his ACL injury.

Apart from Campese was the one trying to make the tackle and Millington put him on his backside with a hand off, great point



And the Westwood "tackle" mentioned in the post was you quoted was high, left Gale in hospital and happened over a second after he passed the ball.

I agree with you on both counts
How about the justin Carney late shoulder charge to darryl gouldings head which ended his career?

Goulding was carrying the ball at the time wasn't he? Carney is a moron on and off the pitch with a lousy and dangerous tackling technique though which is summed up by his disciplinary record over the years.

Will the RFL ban every player who attacks the legs for 4 games or just the ones that cause injury, can of worms been opened IMO.

I'd like to see them do it and bring in a rule that the 3rd man in can't go below the hip. Make it an auto sin bin like grapple tackles, chicken wings and crushers are supposed to be on top of that too.

It would be best to clamp down on it now before someone ends up crippled.

Gale was guilty of at least 2 similar tackles. Just not the resulting injury

I was surprised it even went to the panel, if this is the standard to be set there SHOULD be a lot of bans coming up, but I doubt it. What happened to the 1-2 they said was the range anyway, are they allowed to double it because he plays for us or maybe because he is French. I hope Hudgell keeps a close eye on things and shouts very loud if this precedent is not followed up in other case.

The clowns of red Hall strike again. I've said it before and I'll say it again.
The numpties that run Red hall are so inconsistent that I'm sure the word itself was created and printed in the English dictionary especially for them.
If the tackle had been malicious with an intent to injure, then a ban would have been rightly forthcoming, however, after carefully watching the tackle on TV several times I didn't see anything that warranted a 4 match ban.
As a result of this verdict I believe the RFL have set a precedent and it will be interesting to see what they do in future games when you see the likes of Wigan players in particular employing that type of tackle in a game. Perhaps in future we should notify them every time such tackle takes place that is seen on the TV and if no action is taken ask them.... why not.?
Just don't expect an honest or logic answer from them.
Complete goons the lot of them, once again the disciplinary panel as a result of their actions, are made to look inconsistent and amateurish.

To be honest Sandro it wasn't seeing as you denounced everybody who referred to him as French John from the very beginning

I feel for Shenton, I really do. He's no spring chicken and he's gone through the Hell of predictions season and ended up losing a year of his career.

However, I was very disappointed with his and Powell's comments quoted by the BBC, it was a clear attempt to influence the disciplinary panel.

The disciplinary section on the RFL's website also states a grade B as 1 to 2 games, marked with an unanswered asterisk.

How do they get four?

Just seen Lee Jewitt's cannonball in the same game, far worse but not even a penalty given.

I'm glad were appealing somebody needs to stand up to this decision i feel for Shenton but it was an accident and the red hall idiots have gone on the injury and not what actually happened

Nothing wrong with it as it doesn't put undue pressure in the joint as it from behind, and keeping it the normal range if motion. Boudebza, whether he meant to or not, bent Shentons leg the wrong way.

FWIW I think its harsh to give 4 games. I think hes unlucky to be banned at all, as had Shenton not got injured the tackle would have gone unnoticed.

I can see both sides of this.
Cas have lost a front-line player for a whole season because of a tackle that an independent panel have found to be illegal. In terms of the suspension, injury caused has always been a mitigating factor in setting the length of a suspension, hence the departure from the guidelines.
However, I have to assume that the panel had sight of further video footage, as the only clip I have seen is, in my opinion, inconclusive. Ultimately, only the offending player himself knows if the illegality of the tackle was intentional. I dislike it when coaches/commentators or anyone else claim that something is either intentional or not, as this is something only the offending player can possibly know.
All in all, both sets of supporters are disappointed with the incident. However, I suggest losing a player for four weeks is preferable to losing one for the whole season.
I have never liked the third man in making any contact with the legs, it would be easier just to ban it altogether.

I was going to post something myself about intent, so as you have, I'll follow you up.

I can't remember what the incident was last year, but I remember a ref making a decision on a foul that had been commited. The ref had given the penalty and decided that that was sufficient due to the lack of intention from the player. I thought at the time how ridiculous that was for the exact same reason you have stated, in that nobody but the player knows the intention.

A ref and disciplinary panel are there to penalise fouls. Whether the player meant to do it or not, its still a foul. But should similar penalties be given the same grading, and ban? I'm not sure. Its certainly a grey area in all sports.

I feel for Shenton. A solid decent pro.
Boudebza getting a ban is a joke. I like Cas and Powell. However he has let himself down on this. He sends Jewitt out each week and sits watching him trying to injure and assault players each week. I hear no bleating from him about that nor any evidence of reeling him in.
Gronk clearly is a wind up merchant or a Cyclops.
Goulding didn't have the ball....Carney hit him late. Silence from Powell on that. That was a career over not a year out.
Ours is a fantastic sport governed by crooked buffoons. If this ban isn't overturned then a lot of clubs are going to need bigger squads including Cas.

If he is I want a go on his mobile court.

He can't be as a moderator he doesn't dispense enough justice.

He could be Les?

Anyone got any chives?

Your comments are rather odd given Jewitt has never even been charged with an offence during his time at Cas? Indeed, he has spent most of the time he has been at Cas unavailable and caring for his premature and seriously ill twins. Are you sure you mean Jewitt?
However, unless the panel have had more video footage I think a ban is rather unlucky.

Yes I mean Jewitt. The same pr#ck who played for Salford.
We're discussing the rfl disciplinary process. He's an ideal example of what is wrong.
Boudebza appears involved by most onlookers in an accident. Gets 4 games.
Jewitt spends every game assaulting players....nothing.
How sick his children are are an irrelevance. The blokes a thug and Powell condones him making Powell a raving hypocrite on this issue.

The rfl are pretty poor and inconsistent but I wouldn't imagine them being racist

Interesting. I have mostly seen him play for Cas, during which time he hasn't stood out as particularly dirty (as evidenced by the fact he hasn't been charged for anything during his time at Cas). Nor did I really notice him playing against us for Salford.
My point about his absence wasn't really to do with his children, but to point out that despite your claims Powell sends him out to injure players every week, this can't be true as he hasn't actually played that many games for us.
Perhaps you need to sit on the disciplinary panel if you are spotting foul play that is completely missed by everyone else?

dirty sod, should have got longer than a 4 game ban ! end a players season, then get 4 games !!!!

Irrespective of whether or not it was malicious or accidental, the fact is that french john has caused a serious injury with a tackle which has put pressure against shenton's knee joint. I'd be surprised if he's done it on purpose which is why he's probably got away relatively lightly as one deemed to be malicious would have been at least twice as long.

I'd also presume that cas would have been videoing the game themselves so this would likely have given a 2nd viewpoint from a different angle?

Club bias aside, these kind of techniques need stopping or more of these types of injuries will occur

It's simple. The third man to engage in the tackle must make contact above the knee only.