JC and BB the "When Harry met Sally" of SS.com

Or neccessarily wrong? Unlike some I don't presume to know what others think.



The refs opinion was that an elbow was used - the disciplinary panel dismissed there had been any use of an elbow.

Tomkins violent history? He's a rugby league forward, not Ghandi.

The disciplinary panel on the Tomkins send off opened the case by stating In the Panel’s opinion you struck a Hull FC player (Yeaman) in the face with your forearm whilst in possession of the ball. The Panel believed that you had raised your forearm at the defender as he made the tackle, contact was made with the face of your opponent, this contact was reckless, and that it had the potential to cause your opponent injury. The Panel believed that in raising your forearm as you did; you ought to have been aware of an obvious risk of the forearm making contact with the head, but nonetheless raised the forearm where a reasonable person would not do so. In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade B offence (Strikes with hand, arm or shoulder – forearm in possession of the ball - reckless). [/i

I am wondering which part of that description could not equally have been applied to the Ben Cross incident at Castleford?



Why would a referee need to place an incident on report that they had seen clearly for themselves and dealt with. The 'on report' system is surely only there for incidents they are unsighted or unsure about. In any case the referee doesn't need to put any incident on report these days as all games are scrutinised in full by the video review panel who in this case referred it on to the full disciplinary panel. How do you know the Castleford player's didn't think it was deliberate? They were receiving an unexpected penalty while not in possession and quite rightly allowing the referee to deal with the occurrence of foul play.



Deemed by who? The referee who saw the use of an elbow (not seen by the disciplinary panel) or the referee who saw a bump that ended in an opposition player's face. I saw both incidents the same .... perhaps because they basically were the same. A raised horizontal forearm used as a fend, that contacted a defender in the chest and raised up into the neck/head area.

As a ball carrier you either raise a horizontal forearm or you don't. If you do it's almost always (if not always) a deliberately action to try and bump defenders away. If it's raised and used horizontally it's also liable to continue to raise up after the initial bump/contact as it did in both these comparable instances.



The panel dealt with the two incidents seperately. Tomkins was not the aggressor in the first incident and was acting in self-defence after being pushed twice and punched before (understandably?) retaliating. Unfortunately I haven't seen any footage of this and so I am relying on the Disciplinary Panel's report into the incident.



When has Ablett been suspended this season for use of a forearm?



What has this got to do with the Cross incident?

Ok Tonto we'll leave that in the 'Wait and See' file, good one.

This point seems to counter-argue this following sentence,

"You appear to like foul and violent play. I don't."

If Mr Bailey gets involved lets take the moral high-ground, but if Cross in theory gets involved it's all casual 'wont take a backward step' and thats alright.

Talk about non-subtle agendas. That one was painful.

0/10 on that one Old Boy, must try harder.

How do you know the earnings of Mr Bailey?

I like peoples assuming of salaries. It really under-pins and highlights the utter tosh they come out with. Because if they state the un-known as fact, how can we take other 'opinions' seriously.

I questioned Tonto's rugby acumen and it looks as if I was correct to do so. And please do not be as condesending to write-off Baileys medals as 'lucky' to be around, like he is a passenger. He makes his contribution, like the rest of the team in recent years in the line of silverwear. Yes the above mentioned players are very creative, and they are allowed to be especially when the pack (including TMFMISL) get on top.

You have sinken deeper and have now left edgy points to one side and are just spraying verbal horse. This does you no favours.

Your rugby acumen allegation has been answered. Thanks.

We agree Tomkins is not Ghandi - but but he has earned a reputation for violence.




The part highlighted above in red was the judgement of the panel having reviewed the evidence - Note

Because they did not react against Cross which normall6y happens when players think they have been deliberatly fouled eg the Tomkins case.



Sorry I meant last season funnily enough against a Tomkins!



Just pointing out example that most forwards fall foul of use of the forearm at some stage. But there is a difference between reckless with intent and just clumsy.

My point was he didn't back down against Josh Perry and he didn't throw the first punch but he didn't take a backward step either.



I do not like deliberate foul or ly play. Its negative and shows a lack of skill. Neither am I justifying it if it had been Cross. However if the opposition start something I will not be critical of our players defending one another or themselves. EG if a prop forward hits a half back then its fair do's to go to the assistance of the half back.

Bailey is often the perpetrator of trouble as the whole of Superleague knows which is why he is so disliked and also why Tomkins is so disliked.

So do keep up at the back BB and 0/10 to you young man.

Good thread this.

Quite. But if you think Bailey is one of the higher paid established players then your opinion is as flaky as a Donald Trump haircut!



I have consistently acknowleged Baileys usefullness as a benchman over the years and I also have posted when Bailey has been outstanding. Because these occassions are not that frequent is testament to his position as no more than a useful squad member of the years. In fact I will go as far as to say a very useful squad member over the years.

However lets not get carried away. To put his skills in perspective just look at any of the GF winning teams that Bailey has been part of and rank each player in order of importance.



Hit a raw nerve eh.

Translates in reality to Perry owned Cross.

I don't deal with assumptions or finger in the air stuff. I'll leave that to you.

I prefer analytical acumen.

No need to bring Top Trumps scalp into matters.

Thanks for the apology.

I accept.

Earned with who? The referees, the disciplinary panel. You should have little difficulty pointing to the other instances he's been sent off and banned then to justify this apparent reputation?

...and so the agenda against Bailey becomes clear.

Shocking.

You must have spent too long watching your beloved Salford to have missed out on J Tomkins's bad reputation

No. I am saying the ref and panel decided that Tomkins forearm was clearly going to finish up in the opponents face intentionally While the ref and the panel felt Cross's error was not intentional.


Tomkins Case'The committee feel that while the initial contact was with the chest, the forearm was always going up and ended up in the face of your opponent. This had the potential for injury. This view was backed by the referee who felt that the incident warranted a dismissal. Therefore the committee feel that a 2 match suspension is to be imposed but no fine in this case.'[/i.



Yes you are right with only 5 games played he "rested" Bailey again

Typo and you know it . Grow up