Chase had obviously lost his head and went in with the intention of hurting the ball carrier. I think it was a rush of blood and obviously I doubt his intentions were to be that serious. Although Chase does have past form for losing his head and putting cheap shots in. I think the RFL gradings prevent big bans. I wouldn't have him playing for England till he grows up.

Ands it also gets you the lower end of the sanction range, and is only useable on a grade A-C charge.

Intentional strike with elbow while tackling is D-F, which caries minimum of 3-5 (Grade D) to 8+ or period suspesion (Grade F)

[urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/On%20Field%20Compliance%20Sentencing%20Guidelines%202012%20-%20Final.pdf[/url

Section 2.3.4 also refers to injury to the fouled player as being as agrivating factor in the decision.

So what would an unintentional strike with a bicep be?

Seems if you watch the slow mo replay, you would see Chase's elbow never actually makes contact with Ropati, it's just his daft technique makes it look that way at full speed.

Just watched it, several times, and saw it (and repl;ayed it yesterday) several times. How anyone can defend that as being an accidental shoulder/bicep, is quite frankly laughable.

It's amazing what knowing the outcome does to peoples judgement, isn't it?

Like I've said numerous times now, pause it at 11 seconds and you'll see his elbow isn't what hits Ropati.

It's amazing what club bias does to some people's judgement, isn't it?

Ah so club bias means you can't observe photographic proof now does it?



If you want to talk about an intentional elbow, look no further than Ryan McGoldrick.

If you want to get into arguments about how many times an opinion has been given, I'd respectfully suggest your one is on very very shakey ground.

tbh I'd suggest the poster is either a) Chase or b) his legal team desperately trying to plant ideas.

It looks that way.

Right seems nobody here can deal with just a word, here is photographic proof, here is initial contact and just to make it easier for you, Chase's elbow has a big red circle around it:

<REMOVED>

That's as clear as you'll get it because the slow mo replay isn't very good, but clearly shows initial contact is not with the elbow.

Well thats me convinvced.

Me too. Stunning definition.

So he's leading with his arm then, either way it's despicable and he deserves a lengthy ban and I hope he also gets the ar$e sued off him for loss of earnings. I have no issue with Chase but to do that to a fellow player is shocking.

If you can find a real slow motion replay, not one made by a fan and upload it in HD, then you'll get a better defined image, as it is due to the nature of the video, that's the best quality image you'll get but if you can't tell that contact is with his upper arm (you can see the bottom of his sleeve, if you want an easy marker) then you have a problem.



No, just before contact Ropati steps to his left (Chase's right) which makes the contact with the arm, not shoulder.

I actually think the red circle may be highlighting Chase's ar$e.

Still looks like an elbow to the mush to me as well. lol

Yes, you're right: everyone else on here has a problem, and you're the only one who can see the true picture.

How dare you? Apologise to Rangi Gronk at once.

Yeah, he elbows Ropati's shoulder how dare he





You really are dense aren't you? Even with an albeit not very good photo, it clearly shows contact with the upper arm.

He didn't lead with the elbow, but it was reckless and he will get a ban, that's all there is to it.

Are you kidding...he leads with his arm right into the blokes jaw and your dodgy evidence proves that! he follows through with his elbow which probably caused the most damage! He broke a blokes jaw in 3 places and do not give the excuse it is his technique he is an International ffs!

Because every international has the exact same uniform technique do they?

He did the exact same thing to Kevin Sinfield last year, you know what the difference was? sinfield didn't side step and took the hit front on - no damage done apart from being a bit groggy.

Yes, if you zoom in you can see Gronk's feet sticking out of it.

Don't want to be admiting that, the legal types at Red Hall may interpert it as repeat behaviour. Very poor strategy from the defence.