Case Number:
ON/355/23

Morgan Knowles #13, St Helens
Competition:
Super League

Match:
Wigan Warriors v St Helens

Match Date:
2023-04-07

Incident:
Dangerous Contact

Decision:
Charge

Charge Detail:
Law 15.1 (i)

Dangerous Contact - Defender uses any part of their body forcefully to twist, bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player.

Grade D

So Defender (Asiata) uses any part of their body (shoulder) to twist bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of any opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player.

Looks the same to me, as I've said it is the interpretation the MRP puts on the rule that causes the problem.
The head tackle was nothing to do with Matautia, he got what he deserved in my mind. I was using a head tackle as an example. I've no doubt if you look back through your board you will find examples of (our player) got tackled around the head and we got nothing, why did (our player) get a ban when he did the same tackle. I was simply using it as example to show that it is how the MRP use their interpretation of a rule to decide the outcome.
I'm sure Goulding a co's lawyers will be loving this, especially now the RFL have come out and said that if they review a tackle and deem it dangerous they can't change a rule mid season. Only strengthens a lawyers claim that they are failing to protect a players health.
I would have thought that after 1 player has caused 2 season ending injuries and a further injury to another player,all in one game would have at least warranted a caution for him regarding his tackling technique.
By the way, I'm not using this to say Knowles wasn't guilty as charged.

He does a legs tackle, one player goes high and he goes low, for me it looks a great tackle, its just unfortunate that Paasi gets injured.

Even Wellens agrees -


That tackle has left Wigan’s Mike Cooper out for the rest of the season and, iff found guilty at an Operational Rules Tribunal tonight, Knowles could face a long spell out.

Wellens, however, is keen to ensure the issue doesn’t become a ‘trial by social media’.

“We got a phone call from the Match Review Panel on Monday that Morgan Knowles had been charge with a Grade D,” Wellens said.

“What I would say in this situation is no coach or player wants players to suffer injuries but injuries are part and parcel of the sport. Ours is a collision sport and things can go wrong at times.

“I know Morgan Knowles as a person and how tough he plays the game and how honest a person is. He doesn’t go out on the field to injure players.

“I came off Twitter 12 months ago now for good reason, rugby league is about opinion and everyone has them. What social media does is it gives everyone a platform to share that opinion.

It looks to me that Asiata made direct contact to Paasi's knee which caused the injury. I am not sure if he intentionally went for the knee or if he had aimed for the thigh but slightly misjudged it. It's a bit like aiming for the chest and misjudging it and your shoulder ending up catching their chin.

I think direct contact anywhere near the knee needs to be banned because of the risk of injury. Players shouldn't be diving at the knees or legs either.

I can understand why Saints fans dislike the incidents and would be upset if it happened to a Leeds player. Likewise, I am not sure whether it is in the rulebook that the 1st man in cannot tackle around the knee area and/or dive at the legs. I think players need to be more aware that if they tackle anywhere near the knees they run risk of a ban like any player tackling around the chest area risks hitting the players chin and copping a ban.

isn't it above the knee? nowhere near the joints

Quote: tad rhino "isn't it above the knee? nowhere near the joints'" https://www.instagram.com/reel/CvJ8XtyA ... FlZA%3D%3D Have to make your own mind up on that.

Quote: tad rhino "isn't it above the knee? nowhere near the joints'" https://www.instagram.com/reel/CvJ8XtyA ... FlZA%3D%3D Have to make your own mind up on that.

Graham he hit him directly on the knee - very dangerous tackle. This is 16st bloke going at speed on to the knee joint. We used to go mad when Wigan used to pull these stunts.

I agree with the sentiment but potentially ending a player's career is not on. Those tackles were terrible.

No he didn't. Initial contact is above the knee and he tries to wrap arms around.
Unfortunate injury but nothing more

david, I haven't seen the tackle. I meant isn't the law that you tackle above knees

Thats if the player is stationary and you're coming in as 2nd/3rd man

I'm not really sure about the rules, but both tackles look wrong and dangerous, as the impact is with the shoulder and low on the side of the leg. Given the extent of the injuries I don't think we can write them off as just an accident - Wellens is right to the extent that if these sorts of things can be prevented they should be. A tackler wouldn't do this front on as they'd be likely to get a knee in the face. From the back there's likely be no issue as the knee would just bend. I just don't think you should be able to hit with the shoulder that low on the side of the leg that its even close to the knee, as if the foot is grounded the knee's going to be in all sorts.

The one was Paasi was like an NFL block to start with, just getting low and clattering his legs from the side but just in front of Paasi to stop his route, he then grabs the front knee, Holmes comes in on top and it gets horrible.

They both look just plain wrong and if not illegal they should be. The irony of the fact that Saints have sailed pretty close to the wind these last couple of years doesn't altar the validity of Wellens point. It's not only concussion that shortens carreers and impacts post career lives.