I’d expect us to challenge the grading for Byrne. Under the current rules I’ve still no issue with the red but grade E is nonsense when it was plain to see there was no malice or intent in there.

Lees’ is the type of challenge they are trying to stamp out, it i’m sure he didn’t mean to clash heads but his technique was all wrong and it resulted in direct head contact.

I’m surprised Dupree didn’t pick up anything for the forearm, it was careless at best and expected a match or 2 for that. Didn’t see the one that got him a ban.

Grade E is 3-5
A couple of posters are saying 2/3 would be right
If he gets 3 then it will fit in with what people were saying
I dont think it was a bad one, but it was a sending off and in the spirit of everyone wanting "consistency" we have Grading, which leads to tackles imo being placed in higher grades than others which are more dangerous imo.

As for the VR saying it was a yellow, I can confirm he deffo did say it, and the feedback post game is that the VR got that wrong and it should have been Red

Reaper
It isn't an accidental head clash, because he goes in recklessly head up and placing it directly head to head without making an attempt to get the head to the side/lower to avoid head on head contact, and he's done it before, Tom A-one got 3 games earlier in season.
Dupree has got 1 game for a head clash on Batchelor,.and before anyone says why not 2, then it s apples and oranges and you can see Dupree makes the tackle and wraps the arms etc and the head clash is almost side on side to each other, he just should have got his head to the other side.

Is the bit in bold not irrelevant Jukesy? Kendall didn't see the incident; he was playing on until Percy stayed down at which point he asked for clarity from the VR, which the VR gave him, and he then overruled despite not having seen the offence! Surely that is bizzare officiating by any standards?

I don't disagree and it opened up a conversation that is very close to my heart
Obviously I have to be careful, but my take on it has was been that the big screen should be switched off other than for try/no try decisions
For years I've been preaching to 2 x SL officials I know (one has retired) that we go through the farce of the ref asking the lineo near the screen to come on so he can watch it over his shoulder etc.
In this instance imo it's compounded by him not seeing the original offence due to positioning which I can understand, but then the VR giving the wrong advice (and he did) and then Kendall seeing the screen to come to what I think was the right decision (I'm not talking about grading or ban here as that is a separate issue) when maybe he shouldn't but we all.know they do.

The whole system is a farce at the moment. The sending it up as a try/no try being a prime example. I think most people can see what goes on which makes it more ridiculous when a ref gets a decision wrong, the player or captain says "look at the screen" to which the ref replies "I can't". I always want to add "unless it suits you"

The correct decision was reached in this case but I don't think that's the point as correct decisions weren't reached on other incidents during the game (the Lees no card for example) and the often mentioned "evening out of decisions" only happens if it's the same for both sides. Lees doesn't walk (incorrectly ) and Byrne gets a yellow (incorrectly) and we possibly win that game. Lees correctly gets sent off and Byrne correctly gets sent off and, again, we possibly win that game. Lees staying on and Byrne getting sent off tips the balance the other way.

Shouldn't happen.

Quote: Zig "Brian Carney’s idea is similar and far more practical. We need to remember the speed at which the game is being played at. This is not 70’s thuggery.'" https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... m-28766209

Quote: Zig "Brian Carney’s idea is similar and far more practical. We need to remember the speed at which the game is being played at. This is not 70’s thuggery.'" https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... m-28766209

All makes much more sense, now we know you're all pally with them all.

Keep circling those wagons cowboy.

That's what I was alluding to NK. Don't make a fuss and you don't get decisions. It really is coming down to something as simple as that and, like yourself, I think it's a downward spiral. I said to my mate earlier "How long before we get the dramatic multiple roll-overs that we see in football?" Unfortunately, my guess is not long.

It's hard to blame the players though as I feel this is being reffed into the game. The above comment came because he said "Thompson should have stayed down". My take is that he shouldn't need to.

Wigan to appeal Dupree ban https://www.totalrl.com/wigan-warriors- ... upree-ban/

Wigan to appeal Dupree ban https://www.totalrl.com/wigan-warriors- ... upree-ban/

Does that mean we are not appealing Bryne's grading - or is that something we can do by default as it's going to the tribunal?

I'd imagine they'll wait until the tribunal verdict before deciding to put in an appeal or not

Feels like they're spending the petrol money for Byrne and have space in the car, so they may as well take Dupree with them as well.

Fingers crossed for a decent result on both.

As long as it doesn't backfire and have him unavailable for the CCQF. I'm wondering if they already know that Harvard will be available for that so consider it worth the risk?

Havard and Cooper both back for the Cas league game according to Peet today, so both missing for the cup fixture by the sounds of it. The Dupree appeal does look a little risky on that basis but they must have some confidence it at least won't get increased.