: Wed Jul 29, 2009 8:32 am  

Has Clubb ever had a warning letter about his tackling technique? I thought it was RFL practice to always warn a player about this before banning them

Sorry, but we seem to get hammered by the diciplinary guys at every opportunity and I think that the club should make some sort of representation once the season is over, asking for clarity in certain cases. I know that the back office is stretched, but I am sure if we all trawl through the rulings for the last 2 years we will find enough evidence of bias against us.
Like 26 times Saints players up, with fattysat on the loo on 5 and cunningham on 5.
Quins have had 13 visits to the naughty chair with howell top scoring on 4..
So Saints are well ahead of us in visits.....but we are hammering them on matches missed

: Wed Jul 29, 2009 8:56 am  

The whole thing's an absolute joke. The inconsistency as bad as that chump we had officiating on Saturday. It seems this happens every season where we slump midseason due to injuries and trumped up disciplinery issues and then cannot recover in time to grab a spot in the play-offs.

Let's all hope the boys can rise to the adversity and get us back in the 8, preferably starting at Bradford this weekend. Shame Clubb isn't playing really as he would eat their backline... literally.

: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:19 am  

Sorry......miscount.
Fatty Sat on the Loo has been up 6 times so far this year.
1. High Tackle = No case
2. Chickenwing = 1 game
3. Leads with Knee into tackle/Jumps in = Letter
4. High Tackle = No case
5. Slaps an opponent = Man to man, no case
6 Leads with Arm into Tackle = Formal Caution

So 6 incidents, including 2 which are dangerous play going into a tackle which could injure the tackler, a slap around the face (lucky no eye contact there), two high tackles and a chickenwing (topical).....and he gets 1 game.
Clubby on the other hand is up on 2 charges (first time in 12 months) and gets 2 games and a letter

What really gets my back up is that Clubbs young and has a pretty good record, but gets slamed, whilst fattysatontheloo is a seasoned pro who has twice gone into would be tacklers with either his knee or forearm raised this season alone and he gets letters
Over 2 years:
3 visits to the diciplinary for Clubb ends in 1 match, 2 matches and a letter.
10 visits for the Saints player gets 1 letter, 1 game and a caution. In these 10 visits, he has also been pulled up for running in and striking a player.......mmmm...where have I heard that before? Oh yes, LMS got hammered for that while FSOTL got........nothing

: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:33 am  

Well at least we won't be playing Clubb as much now anyway.
He won't be Centre, Howell and Gafa will be.
He wont be SR, Robinson and Williamson are back.
He'll be on the bench as cover.
So lucky for us it happened now, and not couple weeks ago.

: Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:00 am  

aspouea wrote:

The whole thing's an absolute joke. The inconsistency as bad as that chump we had officiating on Saturday.

Thought you'd like to know that your favourite ref/chump has a busy weekend reffing at the willows and then running the line at the Jungle.

: Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:12 am  

gutterfax wrote:

Has Clubb ever had a warning letter about his tackling technique? I thought it was RFL practice to always warn a player about this before banning them

Sorry, but we seem to get hammered by the diciplinary guys at every opportunity and I think that the club should make some sort of representation once the season is over, asking for clarity in certain cases. I know that the back office is stretched, but I am sure if we all trawl through the rulings for the last 2 years we will find enough evidence of bias against us.
Like 26 times Saints players up, with fattysat on the loo on 5 and cunningham on 5.
Quins have had 13 visits to the naughty chair with howell top scoring on 4..
So Saints are well ahead of us in visits.....but we are hammering them on matches missed

Problem is that the RFL Disciplinary board are clearly made up of old farts...who are desperately trying to cling onto the slightest bit of power they have. I'm sure they're the same people that get wined and dined at all the major finals....bet they drive "Jaaaags"

The RFL don't do themselves any favours...but what can you do? Until this generation of wasters move onwards (or pass on!) then rugby league is always going to be second or third best to those sports that are run well.

Be interesting to see if this is brought up in Boots n All this week....can just imagine Stevo's response....sure he'll want nothing to do with it!!

How can a tackle and attempt to ground a short player be deemed worse than Cunningham's effort (once tackled) to strike the player on top of him in the face causing an "ACTUAL" injury....not this "possible" injury that Clubb could have cause??!!! This is Rugby....not Tennis!! RFL Disciplinary Feckers!

: Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:16 am  

As much as I want to believe there is no bias, it is getting harder and harder to believe it with the evidence presented.

: Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:38 am  

PTB wrote:

As much as I want to believe there is no bias, it is getting harder and harder to believe it with the evidence presented.

MATE......I have trawled through a few "verdicts" and we always get the top end. Seriously, if Clubb is supposed to have tried to hurt the lad, then throw the book at him, but if it was unintentional, the warn him. Just a shame we didn't make the CC semis.......he would have only got 1 week then
The diciplinary system needs a total overhaul. I honestly can't see what the panel isn't made up of referees TBH. Surely, of all the people connected with the game, they are best qualified to pass judgement than:
J Spencer R Bridge D Campbell who were the panel last night. There is no background info on these faceless idiots and they would seem to be a Gin quaffing, Jag driving, Golf Club membered group of old farts!

: Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:42 am  

gutterfax wrote:

MATE......I have trawled through a few "verdicts" and we always get the top end. Seriously, if Clubb is supposed to have tried to hurt the lad, then throw the book at him, but if it was unintentional, the warn him. Just a shame we didn't make the CC semis.......he would have only got 1 week then
The diciplinary system needs a total overhaul. I honestly can't see what the panel isn't made up of referees TBH. Surely, of all the people connected with the game, they are best qualified to pass judgement than:
J Spencer R Bridge D Campbell who were the panel last night. There is no background info on these faceless idiots and they would seem to be a Gin quaffing, Jag driving, Golf Club membered group of old farts!

There are at least two very qualified ex officials on that panel mate.

: Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:55 am  

Big Graeme wrote:

There are at least two very qualified ex officials on that panel mate.

ex officials......that's the point.
The game has moved forward, is faster and the players are fitter than they were....even compared to 5 years ago and as such, different to what the panel were used to in their day.
Also, regardless of their past experience, the decision on Clubb when compared to the Cunningham one point to there being something rotten....and it ain't in Denmark either!
I also believe that Clubby got the ban because the guy he tackled is half his size. As Big Mac said, he got the timing wrong, nothing more nothing less. It's not Clubby's fault the little runt makes Rob Burrow look tall.