What an utter crock! Pull the 'no disciplinary record' card when it's your player then claim Wigan are a dirty team despite records showing quite the opposite. There's only one hypocrite here pal!

Ive not read the thread but please tell me Wigan fans arent crying about foul play? That would be utterly hilarious considering they wanted Ben Flower to receive a Knighthood.

Regards

King James

Except they didn't. You're more than welcome to find more than say 3 people (since you're saying "they" I think 3 people out of all the Wigan fans on this board is a small, but fair number). A lot of people on the Wigan board actually wanted him sacked. I know several people who [iSTILL[/i don't want him playing for Wigan.

But this goes back to the whole thing of two wrongs don't make a right. Each incident should be dealt with independently. I don't condone foul play from any player so I can "cry" about this.

It's funny that Wigan aren't allowed to moan about foul play, as to do so would be the biggest single irony in sporting history, yet, for years I've been asking people to prove it. You know, with evidence, to show that Wigan are somehow worse than all the other RL teams. he best thing about it is nobody has ever been able to do it. If anyone can, I'm more than willing to hold my hands up. The way I see it is RL is a rough, fast sport and there will always be infringements. There will also be a fair share of nutters who aren't good in the way the conduct themselves on the pitch. I genuinely don't believe Wigan has had more of them than others.

For instance. I know no Wigan player has been banned this year, and yet Leeds are staring down the barrel of two 5+ game suspensions having only played 8 games this season.

Wigan always seem to get away with foul play so from a disciplinary view point, they don't look as bad as some teams. There were some foul play incidents last season iirc that they argued the toss about until the Disciplinary panel agreed yet other clubs/players were punished for the same offences. I think I remember reading that their arguments were that player A had never been cautioned/punished for that offence before so it should be classed as a first offence just so the punishment was reduced or the player was let off.

Sean O'Loughlin on Chris Annakin is a good example of that.

I do agree with secondstanza as well. If a Wigan player did what Ferres did, well there'd be endless petitions to get that player banned and this thread would've reached Part Three.

That was a tough one because it resulted in a decent injury but not one that was a direct cause - to clarify - the foul play was the head high shot and should have been punished but the way he fell caused the injury and so is the knee injury a result of O'Loughlin's negligence or is it an unfortunately occurance?

The high shot on Kevin Brown earlier in the Leigh/Warrington game. Stewart got 2 games. Had Brown fallen and hurt his ankle, would 2 games have been sufficient?

It doesn't sit right to me to punish the player based on the injury it causes. Punish the offence and if clear, the intent. Injuries are too individual to be punished on. Gildart gets up and is fine, does Ferres get the same punishment?

It was caused by sika manu, it's on the RFL disciplinary page.

Here is a link describing some of what he went through.

*edit - realized im not allowed to post links, just google clubb neck injury

With regards to injury/suspension times I think it should be taken into account but not on an individual case.

Crusher tackles/very bad tipping tackles seem to either cause no injury or really really bad ones (phil clarke springs to mind as well as that poor aussie lad) because of the high risk nature of these fouls they should be very highly punished.

Headshots/crock rolls etc can cause anything from nothing to a heavy injury but I don't think any of them are as dangerous due to the fact they don't directly damage the neck and spine.

I realise that you aren't the liar that slandered Minichiello. However the Sika Manu incident was no charge as it intimates Clubb put himself in a dangerous position. So an unfortunate accident which is bound to happen from time to time in a contact sport, certainly nothing for anyone to celebrate but equally not one to create scapegoats. Furthermore clearly not a deliberate attempt like the Ferres incident so my original post stands and NSW & Phuzzy can shove it.

Mustn't grumble I guess, or someone else will jump on to tell us how dirty Wigan are and how we get away with murder.

To be fair I think the Minichiello accusation comes from Chinese whispers on the forums. Most people know it happened against Hull and someone got the player confused.

Anyway, look up "Wigan Warriors vs Hull FC rugby 13.05.2016 | Super League rugby 2016" on YT, at 1:20. I agree it certainly doesn't appear to be deliberate although Clubb understandably isn't happy and is immediately in some distress.

And yes it was a 9-month injury, which included an operation in which his throat was cut open to insert a metal cage in order to ease stress on a couple of bulging discs - all from that crusher.

Nothing like that fat faced grub Ferres and his despicable attitude towards fellow players, which has raised its ugly head before both on and off the field. Horrible man. Fits right in at Leeds I hear.

Well I know people won't agree but I have an issue with the length of the ban. Not because of intent/carelessness etc which is a mitigating factors for and against depending on your point of view but simply because we have to stamp out any practice which puts undue pressure on the neck or spine.

Clubb and Gildart could quite have easily had their careers ended and past cases have shown that statement isn't an over reaction.

If we are seeing X game bans for late high shots and attacks to the leg then we need to be seeing X+4/5 bans for any challenge that put extreme pressure on the neck and spine. This goes for any player on any team.

Sorry, my algebra is a little rusty.... If X is 1, is that a 1 game ban, or 1 game and 64 minutes ban you're proposing?

Sorry, I'm terrible at explaining myself on forums.

What I'm trying to say is the fact that it was neck/spinal injuries caused by the foul doesn't seem to be taken into account. Just this year Singleton got 6 games for the elbow, we have seen Chase get 7 games for attacking a lower limb and Flower 6 months for that 2nd punch.
I don't want to get into how much the above were deserved but considering how incredibly vulnerable the neck and spine is I think there should be much higher bans for tackles which cause damage (or risk causing damage) to these areas compared to others. intended or not they simply have to be stamped out completely.

p.s. X is 10 in roman but in this case i was using it algebraically

it would be nice if a poster isn't sure who was involved in a potentially illegal tackle or incident could just say something like 'a hull fc player' instead of erroneously naming a specific player. if it wasn't for a certain poster commenting, the false allegation against MM could have remained on here. sooner or later i can see action taken against this forum and that could be the end of it.