Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Wed May 02, 2012 2:11 pm  

isaac1 wrote:

If it had been done to one of ours, we'd be crying out like the wire fans are!

I wouldn't. I would be like all the Wire fans were at the time. Oblivious to any offence.

Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Wed May 02, 2012 3:10 pm  

didn't seem like much at the time.. but when you watch it back you can clearly see that its a crusher tackle.. im sure the lad didnt mean to cause injury with it.. and its probably down to poor technique rather than malice.

But the rules are the rules for a reason... its those types of tackles which could lead to a broken neck.... if a warrington player would have done that i would have no qualms whatsoever with a 3 match ban.

Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Wed May 02, 2012 4:27 pm  

I thought Jeffries was more at fault for grabbing the back of his head/neck in the tackle.

Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Wed May 02, 2012 5:25 pm  

Anyway it's done now, so let's hope the 9 fit/not banned players we have left will do the business next weekend. I would play the cleaners in the pack, and move Koppy to FB and Burgess on the wing outside Manu. Then I'd close a couple of turnstiles at 3pm sharp and them old lads can go on the bench. They could have their kit on under their coats.

Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Wed May 02, 2012 5:41 pm  

Jeffries and Kearney at prop - London Broncos/Harlequins/Fulham* - * delete as applicable - don't realise what is going on till half time by which time they are 50 points down.

That is one thing you can always say with certainty about the Bulls - we never do things the easy way!

Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Wed May 02, 2012 6:31 pm  

as i have said previously there is no intent it is just poor technique, which needs to be drilled out of him now before it becomes a habbit. At the end of the day he is only 18 and young enough to learn and i am sure he will gain more out of being punished for it than just letting it slide.

Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Wed May 02, 2012 7:48 pm  

Whatever.....

Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Wed May 02, 2012 8:22 pm  

wolfinwidnes wrote:

as i have said previously there is no intent it is just poor technique, which needs to be drilled out of him now before it becomes a habbit. At the end of the day he is only 18 and young enough to learn and i am sure he will gain more out of being punished for it than just letting it slide.

This is the most ridiculous statement I've ever read on here.

Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Wed May 02, 2012 8:57 pm  

steamingbull02 wrote:

Can't believe so many people are up in arms about this, very reckless what should have been dealt with by childs at the time, simply becouse it's not called up every time it's done in a match doesn't make it ok, funny how it's the same people who's bitching about batement were bitching about bridge maybe not being banned! Can't have it both ways!

Batemens a young kid with a hell of a future in the game, daft decisions this early in his career need ironing out as soon as Possible, feilden at a similar sort of age was also called for tackle technique, and I can remember everyone screaming foul of that too, helped him no end though!

Have a word with yourself mate!!!
The difference is clear...bateman was completing a tackle( I agree it "could" have been worse than it actually was )..But Chris Bridge Intentionally struck an opposing player with the elbow, 1 game ban to batemans 3 games...Joke!!!

Re: Bateman Back at Red Hall : Thu May 03, 2012 3:19 am  

The judiciary is rightly taking into account the potential seriousness of the injury. If you forearm smash someone in the face as they're running, its virtually impossible to break their neck (as some have bizarrely suggested). You also can't break someone's neck by whacking them in the face with a forearm when they're lying on the ground.

What CAN break someone's neck is landing on their head from even a relatively low height with their bodyweight behind it, or having someone else land on their head to the same effect. The bodyweight makes all the difference to the force applied, combined with the direction of the impact.