If someone was on my windpipe and I wanted them to get off, I'd be grabbing at the arm on the windpipe first.

RFL view of the incident...



rlhttps://www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3610rl

/thread

Surely it depends on your body position relative to the arm [Edit.

And from a self defence point of view you'd be making a mistake - it's far more effective to go for the face than to try to out muscle an attacker (there's a natural reflex to pull away and protect the face...especially the eyes)...of course in a rugby match it's not quite the same!!!

How can he have his arm locked yet scratch at his eyes?!
If they're talking about the other arm, surely that's holding the ball and it would be poor to try anything with that invade he loses it?! Seems a strange thing to write in the disciplinary!


But this isn't self defence in the street, it's a rugby match as you say. Attempting to scratch at your opponents eyes isn't an acceptable defence. It's like says "he put an arm in my face do I bit it" is OK.

He scratches, and then open palms him in the head because he got roughed up in the tackle, and yet gets nothing. In fact, he got rewarded a penalty. What sort of message does that send out?

Bless.

Not only was it a deliberate and disgusting eye gouge.....Ol' Smackhead plead rlGUILTYrl to both charges!

You can't possibly be that stupid. I'll just assume you missed this bit...



I was stating the facts of the case. I've got no idea why you responded to be honest.

I responded to the usual cherry tinted nonsense you Pie People manage to trot out whenever any of your players, or indeed your Club steps over the line.

[i"The panel believe the player's actions were reckless and contact was certainly made with the eyes of the opponent"[/i.

Even if they did accept his Plea in Mitigation that it was not deliberate , I don't, nor I suspect do any non Wigan fans who watched the replays either.The 4 match ban, plus another for striking the guy is a pretty clear indicator of what they really thought of this obnoxious individual.

He plead Guilty to gouging. Hardly the response of an innocent person who is convinced of his innocence, and received a 4 match ban for the offence. As always, Google is your friend, and would suggest you look up the words guilty/culpable/blameworthy/reprehensible......

Don't understand how they say he doesn't make contact with his eyes. Just about every poster on here (including Leeds fans) accept he made contact with the eyes. Even Stevo saw it!

Some say minimal, others say he tried blinding him, but everyone accept he made contact with the eyes except the numpties on the disciplinary panel.

For me Ablett scratched at the eyes. Wasn't as bad as Hocks but has no part in our game and is worth a 3 match ban.

He doesn't actually make contact with the eyes. He was very very close with two of his fingers, and there was a definite scratch/gouge movement. All I can think of is that he's been let off because he missed. There is no justice in the RL Disciplinary Panel because if such huge inconsistencies and it being a complete lottery if someone is charged or not.