Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 6:08 pm  

I may be wrong but didn't Ganson refer it upstairs?

Surely if he was unsure as to whether conatct had been made, it should have been put on report?

I'm sure he asked the fourth official to check??? It may be just me or I'm losing my marbles like Guess Who?



So, if Ganson was unsure - put it on report and Raynor stays on the pitch.

Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 6:10 pm  

http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/ra ... o-game-ban Good call, at least they had their eyes open when watching the incident. The fact he passed the call upstairs is not relevant the fact is he knocked Tomkins out, the technology was there so use it. This is not the first time video ref has been used to look at dangerous tackles or striking so unsure as to why the fuss on this particular case.

http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/ra ... o-game-ban Good call, at least they had their eyes open when watching the incident. The fact he passed the call upstairs is not relevant the fact is he knocked Tomkins out, the technology was there so use it. This is not the first time video ref has been used to look at dangerous tackles or striking so unsure as to why the fuss on this particular case.

Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 6:19 pm  

Wasn't Morley dismissed against the Aussies under similar circumstances?

Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 7:28 pm  

This is actually quite an interesting thread and just shows how this type of incident polarises opinion.

This is especially so since it was seen by millions on national TV, was shown in slow motion from several different angles, and more importantly one of the players was hurt. Seeing a player laying there with glazed eyes not only sends a chill up your spine, but elicits and emotional reaction. Officials have to separate the action from the result and not get drawn into the emotion.

ALL actions that have the potential to injure should be punished, not just those that actually do injure. It would be interesting to see the reaction of the ref and the crowd if Tompkins didn’t have a glass chin (and I’m not poking fun at him) and got straight up. The potential to cause injury would still be there but would anyone have reacted like they have????

We’ve just seen a vicious attack on Chris Ashton in rugby union where the officials fluffed it. I just hope the RFL don’t get on a macho bandwagon and punish unduly just to be seen as “hard” in the media.

I’d assume that the RFL have access to good quality footage and can examine the incident frame by frame. If they impartially come to the conclusion that Raynor was reckless then he’ll deserve a ban and I don’t have a problem with that. I just hope they are impartial.

Call me a cynic, but imagine that game was against Australia and replace Raynor with Billy Slater or even Darren Lockyer – what would happen??

Edit by dreamer: just seen the RFL judgement was 2 matches for a reckless tackle. So it seems they think he was trying to make a tackle and not deliberately punch him in the face.

Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 7:38 pm  

Dominance wrote:

Wasn't Morley dismissed against the Aussies under similar circumstances?

With respect, I don't think it was remotely similar. Morley was running head on at Webke and raised his elbow. I still think if it had been the other way around nothing would have been done. Willie Mason elbowed Shaun Long in the face and got away scot free (but we still won ).

Again, it might just be me being an old cynic, but decisions sometimes appear to be influenced by "political" circumstances.

Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 7:43 pm  

Whinger© wrote:

I'm sure he asked the fourth official to check??? It may be just me or I'm losing my marbles like Guess Who?

Didn't it go upstairs because it was in the act of scoring a try?

You lost your marbles long ago

Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 7:47 pm  

In my opinion it is simple
Dangerous Tackle = Sending Off
Accidental or Deliberate will determine the length of ban

Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 8:14 pm  

Dreamer wrote:

With respect, I don't think it was remotely similar. Morley was running head on at Webke and raised his elbow. I still think if it had been the other way around nothing would have been done. Willie Mason elbowed Shaun Long in the face and got away scot free (but we still won ). .

Dreamer - I take your point, but to clarify I wasn't drawing a similarity in the incident. A few stated the referral upstairs to assist with the decision and was simply saying this process was used in the Morley dismissal. We're all cynical, especially with the RFL!

Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 8:38 pm  

Dreamer wrote:

With respect, I don't think it was remotely similar. Morley was running head on at Webke and raised his elbow. I still think if it had been the other way around nothing would have been done. Willie Mason elbowed Shaun Long in the face and got away scot free (but we still won ).

Again, it might just be me being an old cynic, but decisions sometimes appear to be influenced by "political" circumstances.

I pretty sure the ref used the VR in Morley's red card for his attempted decapitation of Robble Kerns after 12 seconds against Australia.

It's up on you know where, it was never a red card

Re: Raynor - Yes or No? : Tue May 24, 2011 8:59 pm  

Dreamer wrote:

We’ve just seen a vicious attack on Chris Ashton in rugby union where the officials fluffed it. I just hope the RFL don’t get on a macho bandwagon and punish unduly just to be seen as “hard” in the media.

I'll agree with you to an extent on this, it was just a bit of good old fashioned biff.

In fact I'd go as far to say it was a rather nice 3 punch combo from Tuilagi. Ashton probably deserved it and it was the most entertaining thing I've seen in Union in years.