Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:46 pm  

number 6 wrote: looks like your all thick and unable to read http://www.rugby-league.com/the_rfl/disciplinary read(if you can) calisle then sickinotes late hit on a kicker is a yellow unless its captain sicknote Didn't the disciplinary say the initial contact was with an open hand and to the chest? Are are the disciplinary only correct when you approve of what they say?

number 6 wrote: looks like your all thick and unable to read http://www.rugby-league.com/the_rfl/disciplinary read(if you can) calisle then sickinotes late hit on a kicker is a yellow unless its captain sicknote Didn't the disciplinary say the initial contact was with an open hand and to the chest? Are are the disciplinary only correct when you approve of what they say?

Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:49 pm  

secondstanza wrote:

Didn't the disciplinary say the initial contact was with an open hand and to the chest?

Are are the disciplinary only correct when you approve of what they say?

it reads very similar to me, late hit i assumed was automatic 10

on friday night the officials got it wrong,(probably a reason the game got like it did in the first half)

Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:54 pm  

From the RFL site;
Obstruction after kick (j) A common form of obstruction occurs when a player, after kicking the ball forward, is tackled or impeded by an opponent. However, a tackler cannot be expected to delay making a tackle because the player in possession might decide to kick the ball. The onus is on the kicker to get his kick in before his opponent commits himself to the tackle.

The ball has been kicked before the opponent commits himself to the tackle. He should be penalised if he obstructs the kicker.
________________

Can't find any mention of an automatic yellow though but if SOL went in after the kick was taken then its a pen.

Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 4:00 pm  

number 6 wrote:

it reads very similar to me, late hit i assumed was automatic 10

on friday night the officials got it wrong,(probably a reason the game got like it did in the first half)

A late hit isn't an automatic 10, for cases exactly like this one where it would be incredibly soft to sin bin him. The only rules I can think of like that are that professional fouls are an automatic sin bin. Kicking, headbutting and gouging are automatic dismissals. Pretty much everything else is ref's discretion based on severity, intent etc. Obviously with this one it wasn't very severe, and the intent was to charge down the ball. FWIW I agree with the call on the Clubb no try, and that Watts shouldn't have seen red, but this was never worth a yellow.

Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 6:20 pm  

Wilde 3 wrote:

No charge for Liam Watts. The RFL see sense, though probably down to the social media attention from current/ex players about it being the wrong decision.

Thanks to the referee, we have been reduced to 12 men, in a vitally important game that we lost in the last few minutes, due to an incorrect call. Brilliant.

You lost because you had 12 men? Or because you couldn't close out the game? Or because Sneyd's tackling is poop? Or because Shaul knocked on when you had the chance to win the game again?

More convenient to blame someone else though I guess.

Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 7:03 pm  

If Bateman had done the same to Houghton I'm sure Hull fans would still say yellow card ?

Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 7:59 pm  

Wigg'n wrote:

You lost because you had 12 men? Or because you couldn't close out the game? Or because Sneyd's tackling is poop? Or because Shaul knocked on when you had the chance to win the game again?

More convenient to blame someone else though I guess.

All of the above, but you cant deny that in a game between two well matched teams, playing for an hour with 12 men is a huge disadvantage, and given the closeness of the game you would have to think Hull would have taken it with a full compliment.

Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 8:11 pm  

Mr. Zucchini Head wrote:

All of the above, but you cant deny that in a game between two well matched teams, playing for an hour with 12 men is a huge disadvantage, and given the closeness of the game you would have to think Hull would have taken it with a full compliment.

I'll do you a deal. Give me the Clubb try and a match winning 6 points and you can have your 2 league points from Friday. Given the choice I'd rather have that bit of luck in a CC final than a super 8's game.

Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 8:58 pm  

Wigg'n wrote:

You lost because you had 12 men? Or because you couldn't close out the game? Or because Sneyd's tackling is poop? Or because Shaul knocked on when you had the chance to win the game again?

More convenient to blame someone else though I guess.

Not very comparable is it. One missed tackle, one knock on compared with 60 minutes with 12 men.

More convenient to ignore the completely obvious though I guess.

See you at Old Trafford

Re: GAME ON : Hull FC v Wigan Warriors - 20:00:00 : Mon Sep 11, 2017 9:02 pm  

craig hkr wrote:

If Bateman had done the same to Houghton I'm sure Hull fans would still say yellow card ?

Highly unlikely scenario. Houghton has been the Leagues top tackler for the last 5 years as he knows how to tackle, not impersonate Ram Man from masters of the universe.