Quote: Trainman " Smithies was leading with the head most of the game and it wasn’t just with Knowles it was with others. I,m pretty sure he had form for head butting and a crusher tackle and got punished for it. There was also an instance of putting his studs on Lussicks head which for some reason didn’t get picked up by the disciplinary maybe Ben Flower was on the panel over the weekend. https://www.totalrl.com/morgan-smithies ... y-charges/

Quote: Trainman " Smithies was leading with the head most of the game and it wasn’t just with Knowles it was with others. I,m pretty sure he had form for head butting and a crusher tackle and got punished for it. There was also an instance of putting his studs on Lussicks head which for some reason didn’t get picked up by the disciplinary maybe Ben Flower was on the panel over the weekend. https://www.totalrl.com/morgan-smithies ... y-charges/

The 2 players wouldnt back down and so they shouldnt,nothing in it as per the panel

lol ok m8

I see the obligitory ban for a Saints player has been used again. It's so consistent they could probably base the interest rates on it.

Seems like a mature response.

There are posters who want this latest incarnation terminated. It's even been suggested on this thread.

I can see why.

Maybe they get banned because they are guilty of foul play,I know its a radical thought but there you go.

Indeed. But we get away with absolutely nothing. For example, Farrell's high shot in the derby. Penalty, no ban, I agree with that. If that's a Saints player, he's banned for two weeks. The consistency issue is still there and possibly worse than ever now they are throwing bans out like Grandma's send Christmas cards.

And there you have the key- consistent.
Consistent foul play. Consistent bans. Seems fair enough.

Well he didnt get banned so deemed not worthy of a ban how do you know if it was a Saints player he would get banned you just dont know !.

At the min Saints are the dirtiest team in the league looking at the bans and penalties against that is all,unless another team has more then it would be them.

As you get away with nothing ,only if you exclude 2 blatant strips (one a try) and a couple of forward passes thrown in as well.
Before you lose you mind and start telling everyone of how Wigan get away with more or indeed any other team ,dont bother we are not interested.

I think the problem is that we play at a level similar to the NRL with toughness and aggression. I remember Sironen saying something similar making it easy to blend into the team. That’s probably why Sironen gets so many bans because his NRL tackling technique hasn’t needed to change.

Woolf will have to adjust his defensive model to align with the disciplinary tolerance, it appears we do still have some parity issues with opposition players not being disciplined in the same manner but it’s up to the club to raise evidence and ask questions with the RFL.

another Saints player banned,must be a mistake.

some other players banned would like to point out the consistency issue.

Saddened, we've covered that on RedVee and analysed it. Farrell initial contact was high up on the chest and Knowles head went back into Bell causing whiplash, split second later Farrells shoulder and arm raised up into the face of Knowles. Disciplinary looked at the first point of impact-upper chest and not recorded the incident.

I'm not talking about when Knowles got injured, I'm talking about the high shot on their own line.

Right OK, I don't remember that one.