Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Mar 06, 2024 11:14 am
Saddened! wrote:
The technique itself is banned. You aren't allowed to spear your bodyweight at the ball carriers legs, ban him for that and the clear intent. They acknowledge the intent and the danger to the ball carrier and still decide to let him off. Even if they decide they can't ban him due to sticking religiously to the framework, just issue him a warning not to tackle like that. The puerile, childish reponses from the usual suspects on here just show how bitter some of you are towards Saints. It's hilarious when it's a Saints player out of the game for 9 months+ and spending 4 months struggling to walk, with no date for a return still. If it's Hayes' knee he points backwards or Ashton's or Lindop's career he ends? I suspect you won't find it as funny then.
The fact he's attempting to do it again is bad enough, why should they wait until he's disabled someone or ruined a second career before acting? Given the context as well, his first involvement against Saints since he injured four players in one game with it, and he goes straight for the knee of another player? It's odd that it's allowed in an age where the RFL is supposedly working to improve player welfare. Your opinions on it would do a 180 very quickly if it wasn't Saints, or if it was Saints tackling like that.
The fact he's attempting to do it again is bad enough, why should they wait until he's disabled someone or ruined a second career before acting? Given the context as well, his first involvement against Saints since he injured four players in one game with it, and he goes straight for the knee of another player? It's odd that it's allowed in an age where the RFL is supposedly working to improve player welfare. Your opinions on it would do a 180 very quickly if it wasn't Saints, or if it was Saints tackling like that.
The key to this is where the contact was made, that will influence the number of games a player receives. A high tackle that hits the shoulder first will get less games than one which contacts the head directly.
The technique is banned for contact below the knee, If he injured a Warrington player with a tackle that was on or below the knee I would agree I’d be angry. Fact is he hit above the knee. I totally agree a tackle that endangers the knee joint should be taken out of the game - and it’s been outlawed. If there are injuries occurring from similar tackles where contact is ‘just above the knee’ then they should review the guidelines again.
At no point would I think it’s hilarious any player was out of the game for any period of time.
He was warned, he was given an in game yellow and a grade A - which I think impacts future suspensions. If he carries on tackling like that he’s going to cop a long ban, but until he does there isn’t much that can be done other than the grade A he was given.
