It was bad, he will get banned, thankfully Tomkins is ok, life goes on.

I asked somebody at the gym yesterday about the incident, as I have not seen the tv pictures of it, what they thought of the incident. They commented back that it looked bad at first. I said what do you mean at first, was it bad or not. The response was that the commentators were fuming about it. I asked again, if you had turned the sound down was it bad. The response was that he was stupid going in like that, but it looked like he was protecting himself more from the impact rather than going for the other player.

So I am still non the wiser on the incident.

Agreed, where did i say otherwise?

Correct.

There's no doubt the Sky commentators made more of it than it was. Don't get me wrong it was a bad one but not as bad as Steve et al made out.

Have you seen the size of Ablett (who was moving, Tomkins was stood still) compared to S Tomkins? If you need to "protect" yourself like that, then he shouldn't be playing rugby league.

Size doesn't matter in RL.

It doesn't matter anyway.

I look forward to this board going into meltdown if Ablett doesn't receive a ban! Mr McF may be busy

I really doesn't matter what is right or wrong, nor does it matter if it is illegal or not - incidents like this occur all the time so, like it or not, they are therefore part of the game - what is so hard to understand about this. You bleating on about it isn't going to stop dangerous tackles. I think you should continue this conversation with King Canute, he had the same outlook as you but on tidal wash!




This is really the 'dimmest' thing you have posted so far (and there has been plenty of contenders) - you are branding me a hypocrite for NOT posting an opinion - really!!!, so you are expecting me to post my opinion on every incident that occurs in every Rugby game ever?

imo its the one of the worst things that can happen to a player when they are hit when they cannot defend themselves and cover up,has an ex player myself i thought ablett was reckless and although not intentional it was more good luck that tompkins hasnt broken his jaw.

i listened to the re-run on radio leeds with jason demitriou and to say he was disgusted by the challenge was an understatement,has a current player he understands what its like to be out their and to see an attack to another proffesionals head like that is the worst possible challenge and it should be punished.

i can see the rfl giving ablett at least 2 games with it been reduced to 1 on appeal but imo its nothing close to enough.

Sorry, it mean to say post of "yours". Actually, you mean nobody from Wigan is talking about it because they're self righteous hypocrites. Both TVOC and i have mentioned it a few times.

It's just that Ridell was penalised for an attack to Burrow's head (unlike Ablett how has not yet been found guilty of such an offence). If you're really not a biased supporter spouting bile about one specific incident I'd have expected your righteous crusade to have included Ridell's penalised actions. But it hasn't done. That's why I don't take you seriously.

And I won't be calling for a Ridell banning because, unlike you, I take a bit more of a balanced view of the game and understand that players, playing at such high intensity often make errors of Judgment or slips in technique. These things happen. My cajones are a little bit too big to start squealing about life time bans etc.

HTH

G1 - What is also interesting is all the keyboard warriors who think they know the laws and the various guidelines but have never taken the time to read them and just assume that they know them, or there opinion should be the law and can't understand why it isn't!

The review panel will currently be sitting looking at the videos from the weekend. The first thing is that they will watch the Ablett incident at full speed from as many angles as available, over and over again if required, and rarely look at contact with the head cases in slow-mo unless they think there is good reason to. Why? Because slow-mo distorts the viewers perception of time, as we live our life in real time and not slow-mo, they need to consider split second actions of players and what impact that had on the intent and outcome.

They have to decide if the tackle or intended tackle was either Careless, Reckless or Intentional or none of them. If they decide it was not any, they can still issue warning and letters which will be placed on a players record.

So, was Ablett Careless, Reckless or Intentional in his tackle on Tomkins? I think he was possibly Careless and maybe at a push Reckless but I do not think it was Intentional AND you have to look at the specific definitions of these terms in the guidelines. This means the 'guide' on suspension is 0 to 3 games!

Now, lets look at aggravating factors

Previous Record
Violence
Retaliation
Injury caused
Incident not part of play
Other aggravating factors

and mitigating factors

Previous Good Record
Provocation
Technique or Fitness in some cases
Genuine Remorse
Other Mitigating Factors

So, when you look at the aggravating factors for Ablett there isn't any, he does not have a previous record to speak of and did not cause injury (luckily).

When you look at mitigating factors he has a previous good (well excellent) record and suspect that he did apologise to Tomkins after the game and will tell the disciplinary panel (if he gets there) that he was remorseful. Not injuring a player is not a mitigating factor BTW, for obvious reasons.

So, is Ablett going get to get a ban? Well if he does 1 and possibly 2 matches would seem to me to be the maximum, IMO, he is looking at. I also think that, given his excellent record, that not getting one at all but being fined £300 quid along with a warning is a likely outcome.

Predictions - Ok, when the review panel publish their findings this afternoon if Ablett is charged with being Careless I think it will be a fine and warning, if he gets charged with being Reckless he will get a one match ban. If he gets charged with being intentional, well I will be very surprised!

So, if my predictions come true, before the keyboard warriors start spouting the usual rubbish, read the guidelines and the reports and then tell us why they were wrong... bet you they don't though!