Quote: Captain Hook "Any view on that KPP “tackle”. On repeat viewing looks nothing more than a blatant attempt to injure an opponent.'" Saw it for the first time yesterday, I will admit that it's a not a good one and I'm really surprised the RFL didn't pick up on it (im not sure they can retrospectively). Deserved at least one match. Especially considering the tackle was made against Clarke who'd just come back from a groin injury I believe. For those who haven't seen it: https://twitter.com/nico_1467/status/16 ... uvr4w&s=19

Quote: Captain Hook "Any view on that KPP “tackle”. On repeat viewing looks nothing more than a blatant attempt to injure an opponent.'" Saw it for the first time yesterday, I will admit that it's a not a good one and I'm really surprised the RFL didn't pick up on it (im not sure they can retrospectively). Deserved at least one match. Especially considering the tackle was made against Clarke who'd just come back from a groin injury I believe. For those who haven't seen it: https://twitter.com/nico_1467/status/16 ... uvr4w&s=19

He's extremely highly rated, however he is only 20 and still needs a lot of size on him yet. I know this will sound far fetched but I've seen enough of him at Reserve level to think he potentially could be another Luke Thompson in terms of his engine and running style.

Wellens has been getting his interchanges horribly wrong culminating in a complete waste of a sub on Friday where Bell went off and literally came back on within a minute.

Yes I understand that and I note your sarcasm yet again when I'm trying to make a legitimate point. If I wanted to be argumentative I'd have put KPP's tackle on here which wasn't even cited unbelievably.

The point I'm making is that the MRP have given a "Not applicable" against Lees which by my understanding is no offence i.e the officials got it wrong.Had it have been a correct high tackle then he would've been banned as he has already been charged and fined from the Hudds game.

You're correct, but that happens to EVERY single club at some stage of the season and on multiple occasions, but again you're trying to claim that Saints are being hard done to.

I've said it before, you can't play at 99 level aggression and then when a player gets it wrong and it becomes over the limit complain about the repercussions.

A bizarre incident that one. I’m honestly stumped on what it actually was intending to do. I wouldn’t have had any complaints had he picked up a game. The description of what it was would’ve been interesting.

Two issues with this.

a) He didn't get it wrong hence the Not applicable result.
b) Given we have been on the wrong end of this 3 times already and we are not yet out of April, then I think we are entitled to feel hard done to.

The pulling of a players leg is one of my pet hates, it happens pretty regularly perhaps it will be on peoples minds now. the suggestion that he did it targeting Clarks injury is stretching the argument for his punishment.

KPP is a lucky boy and got away with one there. That looks like a deliberate attempt to open up/hyperextend the groin/hip area, and if not truly dangerous it's at the least absolutely daft.

Less of that please, lad.

a) he did because the TJ said it was a sin binning offence and the referee decided to change his own mind based on that report. Just because the MRP didn't feel it was worthy of more doesn't mean it wasn't a penalty at the time
b) the RFL must really hate you

a) It may have been a penalty but he was sinbinned. Thats my argument
b) True. Probably getting tired of us winning it every year and want to make the competition a bit closer, give the others a chance.

I didn't remember the KPP 'tackle' (and I've watched the game back! ), but that's not a good look at all. Grabbing a leg or ankle at the end of a tackle is usually just trying to slow it down a bit, but that looks like a deliberate attempt to injure.

We've had the Makinson squirrel tackle and now the KPP Kipper Splitter

Best part is you can hear the Wire fan rage slamming something in the background.

As the RFL look at everything now days,I can only think that the KPP "tackle" could be judged as-
1,
The leg that was lifted could not rotate any further as it had hit the body of the Wigan player on his knees.
2,
The other leg of the tackled player was lifted aswell thus rotated with the lifted leg (it wasnt trapped under a body thus becoming a Kipper Splitter)unlike a chicken wing as the rotation carries on as there isnt anything to stop the rotation only the body of the tackled player.

This is what the panel could have come to the verdict and nothing was said because 100% they would have watched the footage.
By the way I am not condoning it.