Which is exactly why the outcome should be NFA - Video inconclusive.

But this is the RFL.

Fozz is on twitter IN RESPONSE to what are clearly erroneous claims made by some members of the Leeds set-up. I think there's a big difference there... they've initially talked bull**** to try to damn a player and Fozz has said "Er, hang on a minute!".

I see no comparison between the two - At best Fozz is only trying to influence the outcome back towards some modicum of impartiality after the media have already stung Rangi up on the strength of McDermotts and Hardaker's lies.

Sounds pretty accurate to me. Also consider the perfect position the referee was in to judge the impact, which was far better than that provided by the camera angle.

In relation to point d, if in fact Chase's elbow did hit Hardaker's chin, I'm not sure if he'd know that, had he actually been knocked out. Chase's elbows must be in an unusual place on his body too...

What is for certain, as this thread amply demonstrates, is that throughout the season, fans of a club will vociferously defend their own player for a challenge that, if it was inflicted on said player by someone from another team, would see them take to the streets with pitchforks.

If you get some perspective on the situation, you'll realise that Chase is being called in to answer questions about a challenge that resulted in injury, using the same rules that apply to every other player; he hasn't been found guilty yet and despite the ridiculous anti-Cas conspiracy theories, or Gronk QC whipping up wrongheaded hysteria about prejudicial hearings, it's a reasonably robust system for handling disciplinary matters.

As for the jeering at Hardaker for being soft, that just shows a lack of class.

Zak iis not soft by any means and it would be a foolish and a wee bit cowardly to imply that on a forum.

Would say more about you than him.

Did it result in injury B2K ?

What did "Leeds" actually say?

Hardaker has now changed is mind. It wasn't an elbow according to his tweet.

Yes, legal or not Hardaker was unable to play the rest of the game

Great Post

I can confirm without a shadow of a doubt that the ref put the incident on report before he saw Hardakers tweet.

Wrong, I think you'll find the majority (and certainly myself) defending Sam Moa for a worse challenge last season.



Again, that is wrong - he has been charged with a "reckless shoulder charge" - now, I ask you this - how is Con Mika given NFA "making a legitimate attempt at a tackle" for his flying headbutt whilst Chase is charged for a reckless challenge where his feet are set and the attacking player has lost balance and falls into the challenge?

It isn't an anti-Cas thing, it's a consistency thing.



The RFL disciplinary system is FAR from robust and the rules are worded in a way in which they can be left open to interpretation

As for your comments about prejudicial hearings - there were 2 red cards this weekend, Rangi Chase getting taken out off the ball, a flying headbutt and Jamie Peacock ripping someones head off. Which tackle got the most attention? The one that the opposition & Sky kicked up a stink about, one that was deemed legal by the officials and that is the only one outside of the red cards that have been called up to face a ban, again, despite being deemed legal by the officials and no clear video of the incident.



He might not be soft but he's a typical Whino. Who like Luke Burgess with the team bus window incident, got proven wrong.

It's all noise Gronk.

Ask yourself this question - Cas and Wakey play each other; Justin Poore takes Chase out with a full-blooded hit, that *may* have involved contact with the head and leaves him dazed and confused on the floor. The referee is unsure what happened, so puts the incident on report to be looked at later.

Do you (and your fellow pitchfork wielders) say, "fair enough - it was a big hit," or do you expect Poore to be called to account for that tackle, so the disciplinary committee can have a look at it and hear his side of the story?

Calm down dear - this is about player welfare, not persecuting poor little innocent Rangi.

It wasn't put on report, the only signal Tim Roby gave was scrum, Castleford head & feed. Roby was also stood no more than 3 yards away from the incident and had a clear view of it, so are the committee questioning the ability of one of their full time officials?



If there's a worse challenge in the same week let off for a "legitimate" attempt at a tackle then it would be daft, just as this is now.

Does Chase also fall face first into the challenge due to breaking a previous tackle attempt?


If it's all about player welfare then:
Why is Con Mika not charged nor asked to "explain himself" - penalty given during the game
Why is Jamie Peacock not charged nor asked to "explain himself" - penalty given during the game
Why is Justin Poore not charged or even cited for standing on Withers head - no penalty given during the game and rightly so

But if it's all about "player welfare" then all those cases would have been called up.

Now stop trolling, as per usual.