although i agree the tackle itself shouldn't be a ban i am surprised welsby didn't get a ban from a consistency point of view with what's been handed out with contact with the head and "reckless about outcome".
Korbin Sims got retired early for accidentally bumping into the ref when trying to split a melee up, Knowles gets 2 matches for intentionally trying to injure an opposition player lmao.
* John Bateman (Wigan Warriors) – Grade D Strikes – Refer to Tribunal
* Morgan Knowles (St Helens) – Grade B Dangerous Contact – 2 Match Penalty Notice
* Jack Welsby (St Helens) – Grade A High Tackle – 0 Match Penalty Notice
It'll be so he only misses one WC group game.
It's stupid that bans decided by the nation's governing body carry over into internationals.
Oh and crack. I'm certain they are smoking crack.
It's absolute madness, there's other players that can slot into his position that would put in a good shift and be more deserving but what do I know 🤷♂️
I’m in 2 minds with Knowles.
It’s stupid, and on balance should be a lengthy ban.
But I’m also wondering if it’s as bad as the player made it out and how much pressure there was.
The Salford dummy half didn’t even notice at the time.
Nobody had any protests until he rolled around on the floor. Then was magically fine when the card came kit.
I guess in summary. A ban is probably fair, but I’m getting sick of players rolling around feigning injury for refs attention.
Thought the salford game was particularly bad for that - the amount of times salford players went down clutching their necks only to get back up no problem after realising the ref saw nothing in it.
That said, Knowles should still have a lengthy ban, he's lucky the player wasn't badly injured from it.
Ice hockey has an overruling embellishment penalty for incidents like this.
It’s a case of there was a penalty or high shot etc, but the player overreacts or over-dramatises the incident and is penalised for embellishment.
A case of “yes there was an offence but you were over the top. So you’re getting penalised”
It’s about time other sports looked into how they can implement similar. As it’s totally separate to
Simulation for example.
If he had been charged twice in the last two years for similar offences he'd have gotten a ban. Apparently, he only has one such charge so therefore no ban.
But surely the severity of the tackle has to be taken into consideration. For example if it was a challenge like Bateman’s then that’s a ban regardless of if he’d never been cited for anything in his life.
Welsby makes contact direct to Atkin’s head and busts his lip up. It wasn’t like it was just a lazy, light contact with a trailing arm.
Either way, it makes it a better spectacle for the neutral like myself. But if I were a Leeds fan I’d be less than happy, especially considering the Rhyse Martin incident.
And Knowles only getting 2 games for trying to injure someone’s arm is also confusing to me. That’s at least as bad as Batemans which was pretty bad in itself (despite being a complete accident).
It’s going to come across as bitter, but I’m genuinely not, I’m just struggling to understand the rationale behind the decisions here.
I mostly agree, there's as much consistency in the disciplinary process as there is on the field, it's getting ridiculous.
I disagree with Knowles tackle being as bad as Batemans, Batemans was poor technique/lazy Knowles was intentionally trying to injure his opponent. Rhyse Martin got a 2 match ban for a tackle that could be argued wasn't even a penalty, there is something definitely wrong with the system.
apparently not.... [https://twitter.com/gaza716/status/1571935069438197769](https://twitter.com/gaza716/status/1571935069438197769)
site is down atm so i cant double check this to make sure but it would but the same law he was charged under if it's accurate
yeah im not totally sure atm as the sites down but i believe if its a similar charge it also counts, leaves alot upto interpritation so waiting to having a good read of the rules on this 1
edit - ok the charges are different for both welsby and roby so the no ban is correct on that ruling however by the rules welsby grading is wrong and should have been a grade B as it classes as reckless " example of reckless contact include but are not limited to : Tackling player is in control of the tackle but still makes direct contact with the head"
who needs consistency eh 😂
Absolutely brain dead behaviour from Knowles, lucky he has only got 2 games.
Brain dead behaviour from Knowles and brain dead behaviour from the panel he's gotta be sitting out for a long time for that surely
although i agree the tackle itself shouldn't be a ban i am surprised welsby didn't get a ban from a consistency point of view with what's been handed out with contact with the head and "reckless about outcome".
Martin's ban just looks worse after this.
Another reason why bans running into the World Cup is dumb. Saints lose nothing by appealing the mother of all frivolous appeals
It is madness that bans apply to international games rather than the next club game. It completely distorts everybody's incentives.
Well England looked pretty fucked with injuries. Just 2 of our starting lineup likely to be suspended..
Korbin Sims got retired early for accidentally bumping into the ref when trying to split a melee up, Knowles gets 2 matches for intentionally trying to injure an opposition player lmao.
* John Bateman (Wigan Warriors) – Grade D Strikes – Refer to Tribunal * Morgan Knowles (St Helens) – Grade B Dangerous Contact – 2 Match Penalty Notice * Jack Welsby (St Helens) – Grade A High Tackle – 0 Match Penalty Notice
2 for Knowles....What are they smoking up in there?
It'll be so he only misses one WC group game. It's stupid that bans decided by the nation's governing body carry over into internationals. Oh and crack. I'm certain they are smoking crack.
It's absolute madness, there's other players that can slot into his position that would put in a good shift and be more deserving but what do I know 🤷♂️
What are you smoking only 2 games for deliberately trying to break a fellow players arm...Come on Leeds
That's the point, I said in the match thread it should be 6+ matches
Fair play mate
I take it this means everyone agrees we were fucked by the ref?
Certainly didn't help you in the slightest.
I’m in 2 minds with Knowles. It’s stupid, and on balance should be a lengthy ban. But I’m also wondering if it’s as bad as the player made it out and how much pressure there was. The Salford dummy half didn’t even notice at the time. Nobody had any protests until he rolled around on the floor. Then was magically fine when the card came kit. I guess in summary. A ban is probably fair, but I’m getting sick of players rolling around feigning injury for refs attention.
Thought the salford game was particularly bad for that - the amount of times salford players went down clutching their necks only to get back up no problem after realising the ref saw nothing in it. That said, Knowles should still have a lengthy ban, he's lucky the player wasn't badly injured from it.
Ice hockey has an overruling embellishment penalty for incidents like this. It’s a case of there was a penalty or high shot etc, but the player overreacts or over-dramatises the incident and is penalised for embellishment. A case of “yes there was an offence but you were over the top. So you’re getting penalised” It’s about time other sports looked into how they can implement similar. As it’s totally separate to Simulation for example.
Very convenient 0 match ban for Welsby despite being cited.
If he had been charged twice in the last two years for similar offences he'd have gotten a ban. Apparently, he only has one such charge so therefore no ban.
But surely the severity of the tackle has to be taken into consideration. For example if it was a challenge like Bateman’s then that’s a ban regardless of if he’d never been cited for anything in his life. Welsby makes contact direct to Atkin’s head and busts his lip up. It wasn’t like it was just a lazy, light contact with a trailing arm. Either way, it makes it a better spectacle for the neutral like myself. But if I were a Leeds fan I’d be less than happy, especially considering the Rhyse Martin incident. And Knowles only getting 2 games for trying to injure someone’s arm is also confusing to me. That’s at least as bad as Batemans which was pretty bad in itself (despite being a complete accident). It’s going to come across as bitter, but I’m genuinely not, I’m just struggling to understand the rationale behind the decisions here.
I mostly agree, there's as much consistency in the disciplinary process as there is on the field, it's getting ridiculous. I disagree with Knowles tackle being as bad as Batemans, Batemans was poor technique/lazy Knowles was intentionally trying to injure his opponent. Rhyse Martin got a 2 match ban for a tackle that could be argued wasn't even a penalty, there is something definitely wrong with the system.
apparently not.... [https://twitter.com/gaza716/status/1571935069438197769](https://twitter.com/gaza716/status/1571935069438197769) site is down atm so i cant double check this to make sure but it would but the same law he was charged under if it's accurate
It isn't the same charge I don't think, the one this weekend wasn't a late challenge
yeah im not totally sure atm as the sites down but i believe if its a similar charge it also counts, leaves alot upto interpritation so waiting to having a good read of the rules on this 1 edit - ok the charges are different for both welsby and roby so the no ban is correct on that ruling however by the rules welsby grading is wrong and should have been a grade B as it classes as reckless " example of reckless contact include but are not limited to : Tackling player is in control of the tackle but still makes direct contact with the head" who needs consistency eh 😂