Re: Saints (a) : Mon Apr 01, 2024 4:38 pm  

Zig wrote: Brian Carney’s idea is similar and far more practical. We need to remember the speed at which the game is being played at. This is not 70’s thuggery. https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... m-28766209

Zig wrote: Brian Carney’s idea is similar and far more practical. We need to remember the speed at which the game is being played at. This is not 70’s thuggery. https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... m-28766209

Re: Saints (a) : Mon Apr 01, 2024 4:48 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

The whole system is a farce at the moment. The sending it up as a try/no try being a prime example. I think most people can see what goes on which makes it more ridiculous when a ref gets a decision wrong, the player or captain says "look at the screen" to which the ref replies "I can't". I always want to add "unless it suits you"

The correct decision was reached in this case but I don't think that's the point as correct decisions weren't reached on other incidents during the game (the Lees no card for example) and the often mentioned "evening out of decisions" only happens if it's the same for both sides. Lees doesn't walk (incorrectly ) and Byrne gets a yellow (incorrectly) and we possibly win that game. Lees correctly gets sent off and Byrne correctly gets sent off and, again, we possibly win that game. Lees staying on and Byrne getting sent off tips the balance the other way.

Shouldn't happen.

Nothing comes of the Thompson incident because he gets up and Wigan players don’t react. I think that goes back to you pointing out the Wigan players signalling for ten later on coming down to frustration because without doing the arm waving, the rushing in, the lying down etc you’re not getting decisions and this is what we’re breeding.

It’s all well and good players calling meetings and threatening strike action but maybe the first port of call is a collective agreement to stop acting like Spanish footballers. Ironically a couple of the loudest voices in all of this (Walmsley and Brierley) are two of the worst for aspects of what I’m going on about.

Re: Saints (a) : Mon Apr 01, 2024 5:26 pm  

Jukesays wrote:

I don't disagree and it opened up a conversation that is very close to my heart
Obviously I have to be careful, but my take on it has was been that the big screen should be switched off other than for try/no try decisions
For years I've been preaching to 2 x SL officials I know (one has retired) that we go through the farce of the ref asking the lineo near the screen to come on so he can watch it over his shoulder etc.
In this instance imo it's compounded by him not seeing the original offence due to positioning which I can understand, but then the VR giving the wrong advice (and he did) and then Kendall seeing the screen to come to what I think was the right decision (I'm not talking about grading or ban here as that is a separate issue) when maybe he shouldn't but we all.know they do.

All makes much more sense, now we know you're all pally with them all.

Keep circling those wagons cowboy.

Re: Saints (a) : Mon Apr 01, 2024 11:48 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

Nothing comes of the Thompson incident because he gets up and Wigan players don’t react. I think that goes back to you pointing out the Wigan players signalling for ten later on coming down to frustration because without doing the arm waving, the rushing in, the lying down etc you’re not getting decisions and this is what we’re breeding.

It’s all well and good players calling meetings and threatening strike action but maybe the first port of call is a collective agreement to stop acting like Spanish footballers. Ironically a couple of the loudest voices in all of this (Walmsley and Brierley) are two of the worst for aspects of what I’m going on about.

That's what I was alluding to NK. Don't make a fuss and you don't get decisions. It really is coming down to something as simple as that and, like yourself, I think it's a downward spiral. I said to my mate earlier "How long before we get the dramatic multiple roll-overs that we see in football?" Unfortunately, my guess is not long.

It's hard to blame the players though as I feel this is being reffed into the game. The above comment came because he said "Thompson should have stayed down". My take is that he shouldn't need to.

Re: Saints (a) : Tue Apr 02, 2024 10:48 am  

Wigan to appeal Dupree ban https://www.totalrl.com/wigan-warriors- ... upree-ban/

Wigan to appeal Dupree ban https://www.totalrl.com/wigan-warriors- ... upree-ban/

Re: Saints (a) : Tue Apr 02, 2024 11:24 am  

Does that mean we are not appealing Bryne's grading - or is that something we can do by default as it's going to the tribunal?

Re: Saints (a) : Tue Apr 02, 2024 11:27 am  

Big Steve wrote:

Does that mean we are not appealing Bryne's grading - or is that something we can do by default as it's going to the tribunal?

I'd imagine they'll wait until the tribunal verdict before deciding to put in an appeal or not

Re: Saints (a) : Tue Apr 02, 2024 11:33 am  

Feels like they're spending the petrol money for Byrne and have space in the car, so they may as well take Dupree with them as well.

Fingers crossed for a decent result on both.

Re: Saints (a) : Tue Apr 02, 2024 11:58 am  

As long as it doesn't backfire and have him unavailable for the CCQF. I'm wondering if they already know that Harvard will be available for that so consider it worth the risk?

Re: Saints (a) : Tue Apr 02, 2024 12:40 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

As long as it doesn't backfire and have him unavailable for the CCQF. I'm wondering if they already know that Harvard will be available for that so consider it worth the risk?

Havard and Cooper both back for the Cas league game according to Peet today, so both missing for the cup fixture by the sounds of it. The Dupree appeal does look a little risky on that basis but they must have some confidence it at least won't get increased.