Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 10:50 am  

bren2k wrote:

Exactly that; I see this in disciplinary cases in my professional life all the time - someone is before the beak for a misdemeanour and all of a sudden, they want to blow the whistle on years worth of malpractice that has happened before their very eyes, but which they never felt the need to report until their own job is on the line.

For what it's worth, I agree with most of what he's said, but it's meaningless for each individual coach or chairman to bleat about these things when their own club appears badly done to - surely they have some forum in which to collectively let the RFL know that they're unhappy with the inconsistent application of the rules, without club bias or risking a large fine and the wrath of the officials for the coming few weeks?

Perhaps the dialogue behind closed door is ignored and people feel the need to speak out in public? Note, McManus is not the first, nor will he be the last, nor is it the first time he has raised these same concerns.

The last time McManus raised these concerns, by the way, was after lifting the Super League trophy. Was that sour grapes too, because it was only champagne flowing at that time!

Also, the very fact that you say saints could suffer at the hands of refs/disciplinary for having the temerity to make a statement serves only to support a suspicion that the system is flawed/inconsistent/corrupt.

Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 10:59 am  

Saddened! wrote:

No one is saying Saints are angels, if we're committing serious fouls and not being punished they should be, just further evidence that the system isn't working. What he wants is consistency and a disciplinary system that protects players. There is IMO a clear line between an intended outcome and an accidental one and the RFL don't have any grasp on the severity of incidents IMO. In this instance Green used an outlawed technique to deliberately attack the skull of a player in a vulnerable position, causing a triple fracture of his cheek bone. Do we really have to wait until someone dies or suffers a life changing injury before something is done about it? A 6 game ban in this instance would be a deterrent to players. It's not a normal high shot like you compare it to, those are more often than not accidental or reckless. As for the Wakefield v Saints game, the worst challenge was Lauitiiti's, also a shoulder charge to the face which also caused serious injury. Green is only going to miss 1 game for this, which is a joke. Surely you can see that?

I can agree with most of what you are saying, BUT if he feels so strongly about a flawed disciplinary system why did he not back up our chairman and Hull FC's chairman, both who were fined for their very similar outbursts last year. I'm afraid it comes across as not in my back yard because of his comments purely about St Helens being hard done by.

Always had the upmost respect for your club and thought our two clubs shared a pretty good relationship, afraid this statement has disappointed me, not for it's content but for it's poor timing.

(Still hope you beat Wigan tomorrow though )

Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 11:17 am  

Saddened! wrote:

Is there a bit of a difference perhaps between a forward pass and a triple fracture of the cheekbone?

Indeed, it’s one thing allowing a try from a dodgy offside, it’s quite another when a player makes a deliberate attack to the head of another.

After the Ah Van incident Green should have been given the red card, but the referee bottled it, so did the disciplinary, it should have been a Grade D offence IMO.

Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 11:18 am  

Lord McManus is spot on.

Regards

King James

Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:04 pm  

I wonder how vocal he'll be when one of his own players do it, especially that useless lump of cack Masoe.

Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:23 pm  

barham red wrote: 2 years ago saints came to Craven Park in a cup game with the a game plan that was basically a guide to heaqd hunting. Dobson was smashed left right and centre with shoulder charges and head high tackles. This culminated with Meli clothes lining Craig Hall to the extent where it shocked me it didn't break his neck. Ok Meli walked, but we could easily have been playing against 10 men by that point. Never heard a peep from McManus condemning his players or coach. Did he get in a pulpit and apologise to the Rugby world, nope he kept quiet. McManus is a typical NIMBY, complain when its about his club otherwise he'll stay schtum, The ref / disciplinary debate fired off last year, it was surrounding the Mickey Paea banning for a leg charge which he rightly got banned for yet there were another 3 or 4 instances the same week that went unpunished. If I remember rightly Pearson at Hull kicked off, this was backed by Hudgell and the wakefield coach, McManus kept quiet but as has been said it didn't suit his agenda That would be this sickening attack. I don't remember him saying anything back then either.

barham red wrote: 2 years ago saints came to Craven Park in a cup game with the a game plan that was basically a guide to heaqd hunting. Dobson was smashed left right and centre with shoulder charges and head high tackles. This culminated with Meli clothes lining Craig Hall to the extent where it shocked me it didn't break his neck. Ok Meli walked, but we could easily have been playing against 10 men by that point. Never heard a peep from McManus condemning his players or coach. Did he get in a pulpit and apologise to the Rugby world, nope he kept quiet. McManus is a typical NIMBY, complain when its about his club otherwise he'll stay schtum, The ref / disciplinary debate fired off last year, it was surrounding the Mickey Paea banning for a leg charge which he rightly got banned for yet there were another 3 or 4 instances the same week that went unpunished. If I remember rightly Pearson at Hull kicked off, this was backed by Hudgell and the wakefield coach, McManus kept quiet but as has been said it didn't suit his agenda That would be this sickening attack. I don't remember him saying anything back then either.

Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:39 pm  

The Devil's Advocate wrote:

Indeed, it’s one thing allowing a try from a dodgy offside, it’s quite another when a player makes a deliberate attack to the head of another.

After the Ah Van incident Green should have been given the red card, but the referee bottled it, so did the disciplinary, it should have been a Grade D offence IMO.

However, the panel didn't find it to be a deliberate attack to the head. The shoulder charge was late and of course illegal, but the contact with the head was indirect or secondary, therefore Grade B.

Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 5:30 pm  

Bobbin' Along wrote:

However, the panel didn't find it to be a deliberate attack to the head. The shoulder charge was late and of course illegal, but the contact with the head was indirect or secondary, therefore Grade B.

As I said, in my opinion.

I’m a bit of a hardliner .

Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 6:01 pm  

Bobbin' Along wrote:

However, the panel didn't find it to be a deliberate attack to the head. The shoulder charge was late and of course illegal, but the contact with the head was indirect or secondary, therefore Grade B.

Why are the RFL thinking that a shoulder charge that hits the shoulder then fractures a cheekbone is any more acceptable than one which directly hits the head and fractures a cheekbone.

This is a systemic issue and McManus, along with Hetherington and a few others before him, are right to bring it up. The way referees are handled and the disciplinary process itself has become an exercise in PR rather than a good process.

Offenses and their grading have become an opportunity for wiggle room and not an attempt at consistency and this offence is a good example of it.

Rather than asking what did Green do and how many matches does it deserve, they ask where can we introduce uncertainty to protect the referee.

Green had to go. It should have been a simple decision. He should have got a few matches and it should have been a simple decision.

Re: McManus savages disciplinary process : Thu Apr 02, 2015 6:27 pm  

Spot on Smokey. Should've been a red and couple of matches ban.