Re: McManus Statement on Burns Challenge : Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:41 am  

St pete wrote:

Would that have stopped the triple fracture? No it wouldn't! Him carrying on didn't make it any worse

A clairvoyant, expert medic, and comic all rolled into one, that's nice.

Re: McManus Statement on Burns Challenge : Fri Apr 03, 2015 4:39 pm  

Judder Man wrote:

I reckon the best thing to do is to leave it to the saints players if they see it as intention to injure Burns. Just wait until HKR come to Langtree Park and when Green arrives "gang tackle" him with legal challenges to the ribs, you never know he might not survive the onslaught to carry on in the game.

If that is what the Saints players wanted why wait until he comes to Langtree Park. They had plenty of opportunities during the match to do as you suggest

Re: McManus Statement on Burns Challenge : Sat Apr 04, 2015 4:43 pm  

It was a gutless attack which clearly followed on from Burns' dissolving relationship with Hull KR.

As such it was about as pre-meditated as you can get. A one match ban is a sick travesty of "justice".

The trouble is this will undoubtedly boil up when Hull KR come to Langtree Park. There is a very real possibility that someone could sustain a very serious injury because the judiciary didn't do its job.

Re: McManus Statement on Burns Challenge : Sat Apr 04, 2015 5:38 pm  

Aldy wrote:

If that is what the Saints players wanted why wait until he comes to Langtree Park. They had plenty of opportunities during the match to do as you suggest

Because there is a possibility of not many of the saints players seeing the challenge at the time, Burns played on with 3 fractures in his cheek/jawbone his players wouldn,t have known that. Now that the evidence has come to bear post match that it was highly likely premeditated I don,t think the saints players will let it go.
I reckon there will be unfinished business come the return, all done legally of course in our own backyard.

Re: McManus Statement on Burns Challenge : Sun Apr 05, 2015 10:18 pm  

LOL, I figured there would be a fair bit of condoning Burns' triple fracture on Deliverance's message board. But even I was surprised by the new low their fans have set.

Two ... maybe three fans distancing themselves?

Mind, Hull is the only Rugby League town in which I've seen a Saints coach bricked. Twice.

Re: McManus Statement on Burns Challenge : Tue Apr 07, 2015 11:00 am  

St pete wrote:

Would that have stopped the triple fracture? No it wouldn't! Him carrying on didn't make it any worse

As luck would have it you are right. However, another hit to his cheek on that side could have had very serious consequences. It would have turned a short term out to a long term out and could have damaged his eye or the nerves as per Longy's facial injury.

Re: McManus Statement on Burns Challenge : Tue Apr 07, 2015 11:53 am  

Judder Man wrote:

I reckon the best thing to do is to leave it to the saints players if they see it as intention to injure Burns. Just wait until HKR come to Langtree Park and when Green arrives "gang tackle" him with legal challenges to the ribs, you never know he might not survive the onslaught to carry on in the game.

Me too, last time you came to Craven Park in head hunter mode it backfired and it will do again. If you read the disciplinary report it states, the shoulder came of the shoulder and into the head. Green was found guilty and banned for 2 as per regulations. He took an EPG and that was reduced to 1 game.

Its unfortunate that Burns got a bad injury but if you looks at Greens disciplinary record its pretty clean, he's not that type of player. Its also possible that his injury was made worse by playing on for 70+ minutes after the event which is either Burns fault or the doc's.

All ends up I reckon you should stop harping on about it and get on with your season. I'm pretty certain you'll get a couple of wins and it'll all be forgotten.

Re: McManus Statement on Burns Challenge : Tue Apr 07, 2015 4:07 pm  

Walter wrote:

Not sure our guests from KR are covering themselves in glory on this one.

Firstly the better team won. This was acknowledged by our coach and most posters.

The two passes were forward and accepted by most as such.

But Burns was taken out - & the motives have been clearly laid out by KR posters - and the suspension is a joke. To use examples such as Meli is bizarre as he received a hefty ban.

Eamon's statement is spot on and as ever very measured.

There is not usually animosity between us and KR so let's move on and concentrate on the real enemies this weekend.

Completely agree - except for motive's as that is speculation and I genuinely don't believe that the tackle was premeditated. Dangerous - yes, late - yes and illegal - yes. Was the ban in line with the offence - yes, based on current rules but they are ridiculous. Injury to Burns has amplified the situation, had this happened to Kelly for Rovers I would be as miffed as the Saints supporters.

Ultimately McManus and Hudgell are in violent agreement, as are the majority of fans from both clubs. The disciplinary process is massively broken and completely inconsistent.