Quote: Derwent "Gary Charlton, Workington's coach, has also said that the referee described it as accidental contact in his match report to the RFL. Hence why no action taken at the time.
I think Ganson's involvement must come from his newly acquired role as Match Officials Technical Director, I assume he must now sit on the Match Review Panel as a function of that role.
I'm a Town fan, and not a big advocate of Hock who does some stupid things on the field, but in the context of this incident I honestly think he has been harshly treated here. It was not a case of the player approaching the referee during a stoppage in play and angrily remonstrating, it was an incident on the run during a passage of play where the referee got mixed up with the Widnes defensive line. In fact you could argue that a more experienced referee would not have got themselves into that position in the first place. From what I saw Hock was attempting to scramble back in defence, there was no intent to collide with the referee, and it was so innocuous that nobody thought anything of it at the time. To get 4 matches for it seems way OTT in that context.'"
So the ref says its accidental in his match report but nasty Mr Ganson has decided differently and persuaded not only the match review panel to charge Hock but also the Tribunal to find him guilty, all despite the refs report that it was accidental. Can anyone actually show me how Ganson is involved in this? I've seen nothing that links him to this at all yet.
As Smokey pointed out, Bailey got 3 games, Hock got 4. Sounds about right to me, but even if it was still accidental I still don't see how it amounts to a Steve Ganson inspired plot.