Thought Hurrell may have got the longest ban given the red card but the discipline records of Sironen and Matautia probably mean their bans are as long as they are. Leaves us down to the bare bones in the back row with Batchelor out, too.
Thought Hurrell may have got the longest ban given the red card but the discipline records of Sironen and Matautia probably mean their bans are as long as they are. Leaves us down to the bare bones in the back row with Batchelor out, too.
St Helens Rugby League Football Club
So nothing for the head high when Percy was scoring. Sironen’s ban is ridiculous.
It absolutely needs addressing. We're not talking about whether or not a ref missed something; he saw the incident perfectly fine, but deemed it not worthy of any punishment as he said it wasn't a shoulder charge.
He needs some official remedial training on what is and what isn't a shoulder charge, as he obviously, genuinely has no idea what one is going off what he was saying in Friday
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
Very much so when you watch the replay and Myler steps into Sironens path and created the sin binning, thought he would have got a grade A and a warning. Myler is a right cheating grub always playing for a penalty, have no sympathy for him if he picks up a serious injury one of a few serial cheats in our game.
Agree completely. Sironen was running laterally as part of a sliding defence. Given cheating little turd Myler ran into his path, how was Sironen supposed to avoid the collision that happened less than a second after Myler passed?
Players have to be able to commit to a tackle. Without that, the sport is dead.
Myler is a cheat, plain and simple.
We were diddled by a cheating Leeds side that was only able to stay with even an out-of-sorts Saints side, due to their cheating and gaming the ref, who seemed amenable to swallow their cheating.
He's not the Messiah, he's a naughty boy.
Might be way off base here but could we not get Hurrell’s ban overturned on a technicality here? They’ve charged him with Grade C “Strikes” and I’m not really sure how they’ve arrived at that charge as to the best of my knowledge, he never struck anybody? I don’t think he is guilty of striking. He probably deserves a small ban for a late hit and making contact to the head mind, but he’s not struck him, he’s made a late tackle. At first I thought maybe they define a shoulder charge as striking in RL, but can’t be as they’ve charged Sam Walters with a shoulder charge specifically.
I seem to remember Kendall never spoke to the video ref, he took it on himself to justify the decision telling the touch judges it wasn't a shoulder charge, then quickly moving onto Welsby and ignoring Walters putting his head towards Welsby on 2 occasions. Not checked the disciplinary minutes yet, don't know if Welsby got cited for the handbags incident.
Sam Walters decision added to Mike Rush's legendary defence file. Should hopefully come in handy should we get to any of the finals, if we need to pull out the trump card.
Originally Posted by Despondent Dave
All well and good taking the moral high ground like that and of course you are right. That is what the club will be doing. But the fact remains that it shouldn't have happened. Kendall has to give the penalty, it's incredibly blatant and that wasn't a mistake by Kendall. You could see from his body language that he knew full well it was a penalty and he chose not to give it. He watched it twice on the screen and it showed the arm straight down as contact with the point of the shoulder was made and he didn't care. The arrogance in the conversation with the touch judges and Lomax (A well respected senior player) was ridiculous but also very telling. Whether he was just annoyed with Saints or the crowd or wanted to cause a fuss I don't know. It'll be interesting to see whether the RFL stand him down this week or put him in the Championship.
I disagree with that. That happens in almost every game and it's never given against the team who moves forward like that. In almost every other instance it causes the referee to give the penalty. Leeds players did it on mass whenever we fouled one of their players, notably with the Hurrell tackle and the high shot on Sangare. There is no difference between any of those instances, they were all penalties, players moved forward and confronted the other team in all of them, but the referee chose not to give a penalty in one of them. It's an emotive sport and from Under 12s upwards, players would be getting involved there.
Yes the ref was poor,we all agree. But he didn't miss about 8 attempted tackles for one of the Leeds trys. We lost the game more than the ref lost us the game. Our 2 repeat offenders in the yellow card department should know better this season.
'should' is no better than 'if'
Kendall applies the rules uniformly, doesn't fall for Leeds' cheating (play-acting), doesn't ignore a clear penalty offence (despite it being on the big bloody screen) and we win.
We were poor by our standards, but still better than the opposition across the whole game.
The reason why we lost is because of two harsh sin-binnings, a dubious overturning of an on-field try decision, and the failure to penalise a blatant piece of foul play by Walters (made worse by penalising Welsby, who did what Leeds players had done during the game and what happens every game every week).
He's not the Messiah, he's a naughty boy.
Aren’t video refs not able to get involved anyway so lambasting Jack Smith for not getting involved isn’t fair. Lambasting Jack Smith because he’s a woeful ref, is completely fair, though.
St Helens Rugby League Football Club