The debate isn't about whether the sending off was correct (almost everyone agrees that it was), but whether the elbows to the head should have been punished as well.

To be fair, the original debate was actually about the sending off (it is the title of the thread after all). But it seems that most people's gripes are with that Bailey got to elbow someone several times in the head and then have a huge paddy afterwards when the ref had calmed things down (including attempting a head butt on Sean Long in full view of the ref) and still get to stay on the field.

I stroke my daughter's hair harder than Bailey connected with Radford. To say he elbowed him in the head several times is ludicrous.

Bailey's elbow connected with Radford's head 3 times. Counts as several times by my reckoning. And they were swinging elbows. A bit more than stroking his hair.

Radford was in the wrong with his reaction, but I'd say you're very much in the minority if you think Bailey was blameless

Correct.

Then you need your child in care IMO. Lee Radford has played professional Rugby League for 10 seasons next year and I've never seen him lose it like that before.


So? It doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's doing. You're very naive, I'm sorry but if you hit someone with your elbow (especially a big lump of a head like Radford's) you notice it, he continued to do it and then attempted to head butt a player who wasn't involved (and incidently the smallest player on the pitch)

The major flaw in this line of argument is that it only works for the first time he strikes Radford in the head with his elbow, so we can give Bailey the benefit of the doubt for the first one, but once he gives it a few more goes the line of argument pretty much defeats itself. So I'm willing to agree that if Bailey had struck him just once with the elbow it could be seen as totally accidental, but because Bailey gave him a few more elbows to the head for good luck it's just plain silly for people to attempt such flimsy excuses.

All I would say is that he might not have known it was his head. He's pushing out of the tackle to get a quick PTB, it's not the first time he's done it. I won't defend him outright because, unlike some, I don't believe I know exactly what was going through his head at the time, only he knows whether it was deliberate or not.

The headbutt attempt was out of order though.

I'd maybe agree ifBailey knewwhat his elbow is contacting with. Bailey is doing the repeated rocking motion, using his arms for momentum, that all players do to shift tacklers or milk the tackle. At no point is he looking at the tacklers, similar to Senior kicking out in the tackle & kicking the defender in the head. Another action that occurs in every match (without the same result). The connection with Radford's head is no worse than a standard facial.

Rubbish.

1. It doesn't matter if he connects with his head, leg, back, whatever. You are not allowed to throw elbows to escape a tackle.

2. You don't need to look at someone to elbow them deliberately. You might not know they're there the first time, but you do the second, third and fourth time so if you continue to do it, you continue to do it in the knowledge that you're hitting someone.

3. If it's something he and everyone else do every time then he and everyone else should be punished every time. But I don't believe that for a second. You see people catch one in the tackle, but not repeatedly.

4. You're not allowed to kick your legs about in the tackle as it's bloody dangerous. Intentional or not, if I start running about with my studs showing, you can guarantee eventually I'll kick someone. Not having it as an intention is not an excuse, it's just a reason for the accident.

5. I think in the 13+ years Lee Radford has been playing rugby league, he's experienced a fair few facials. If it was just nothing but a facial, past experience would suggest he wouldn't have reacted. I've never seen him react in all the years I've seen him play (even in the derbies). Something's really got to him in this situation.

Plus, at the end of the day Bailey attempted to retaliate on several occassions during the aftermath. He had clearly lost the plot, and he even attempted a head butt to a completely different player. Sure, he never connected with anyone, but there was intent and that warrants at least a yellow. If Lee Radford had missed every single punch, would he have still been sent off?

One Match Ban www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 21,00.html

One Match Ban www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 21,00.html

thats why Radford copped 2 hits to his face then, because Bailey elbowed him so softly

If you didn't use your arms or legs for momentum it would be virtually impossible to get off the ground, more soif there are players lying on you. You see the former numerous times, with exactly the same action as Bailey, as someone described it the funky chicken action rather than a vertical swinging action; since the Senior/Tomkins incident Ihave seen players using their legs in the same manner in every televised game I have seen, so you are wrong again. Even a fat waste of space like O'Meley will do it, otherwise he would wobble around on the floor like a weeble, which is only slightly less productive than when he is on his feet.