Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 4:51 pm  

Diogenes wrote:

Like when Sam Moa got sent off against (I think) London for something the ref was originally going to take no action about?

On that occasion play stopped after the collision between Moa and the other player. On Thursday there was another tackle before play was stopped so don't think they could have gone back to the previous tackle, bit like in VR decisions for a try.

just a thought, I agree in that the VR should have intervened even if it was the previous tackle but think they couldn't

Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 6:41 pm  

two matches and £300 fine

out of the semi final

Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 6:43 pm  

gazcoops wrote:

I tweeted the refs during their Q&A session asking why we still have the report system when they look at incidents after the match anyway. I got no reply. I do however think this was one of the rare times where the ref was correct in putting it on report as it was clear he didn't see it

Maybe in instances like the this when the player is receiving lengthy medical assistance, there is ample opportunity for the video referee to view the incident and make a call??.....

Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 6:51 pm  

So his guilty plea means he did it with intent?

Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:13 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

So his guilty plea means he did it with intent?

I read it that way so why only two matches?

Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:14 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

So his guilty plea means he did it with intent?

I thought the charge was a reckless tackle, not intentional?

Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:46 pm  

A little bit off thread but I saw a super rugby match on sky this last weekend, and a player went down injured. at the next break in play the ref stopped the clock and asked for video to be replayed and a high tackle was spotted and penalty awarded
Is this something that should be employed at televised super league games both referees discussed and decisions made, took all of 30 seconds and player was rightly penalised, seen a few of these insidents on the RU games think we should look at it

Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:49 pm  

Crazyhorse69 wrote:

A little bit off thread but I saw a super rugby match on sky this last weekend, and a player went down injured. at the next break in play the ref stopped the clock and asked for video to be replayed and a high tackle was spotted and penalty awarded
Is this something that should be employed at televised super league games both referees discussed and decisions made, took all of 30 seconds and player was rightly penalised, seen a few of these insidents on the RU games think we should look at it

It favours those whose games are not on TV as much, as there's less chance of infringements being called back. I think something needs to be done, but beyond having the same TV facilities at each game it's not going to happen.

Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 8:37 pm  

Diogenes wrote:

I thought the charge was a reckless tackle, not intentional?

Which is pathetic. The tackle was complete. He DELIBERATELY used the knee twice into the neck of a downed opponent intentionally.

Re: Hauraki : Tue Jul 29, 2014 9:52 pm  

We need to look at punishments and how we can improve it. What does Hauraki getting banned do for Hull? 'On report' is a massive cop out.