bonaire wrote:It also makes the allegation that Griffin mouthed off at Brett Hodgson at training more credible given the two recent incidents
He alluded to his difficult relationship with Hodgson just last week on Hull Live
Quote:Tony has got me playing with a smile on my face again. It was no secret that I had a couple of tough years under the previous coach, but I'm enjoying my rugby again, and that's a massive thing for me.
He needs to watch his mouth on the pitch but I'd still like to see him sign for another year. Done really well this season.
Magic Superbeetle wrote:I’ve held my tongue in this thread as fans are entitled to their opinion; but what you have written is beyond the pale.
Let’s start with the Fash incident. It’s a red card every day of the week. Direct contact with the head with the shoulder whilst prone in a tackle. I don’t think it was a particularly dirty play, but Fash went for an aggressive, dominant tackle and got it completely wrong, leaving a player stone cold K.O.’d. I truly don’t understand how Kendall got to on report; because either he’s penalising contact with the head and it’s a red card, or it’s a knock on, there’s really no inbetween. Those calling “oh the ref shouldn’t have sent Griffin off for the sake of the game”; that good grace was used for that tackle.
After we took the 2; you knocked the ball out on the third tackle which Kendall ignored and you took the ascendancy.
Then you have your second try which Kendall sent up as a try; when McIntosh knocked the ball forwards into Mata’utias forearm and it then went backwards to Savelio, which was ignored/ not overruled due to the silly guess work rules refs need.
And then you get to the insanity that was the Griffin incident. Kendall told him to walk away, he kept gobbing off so he sin binned him. He still kept gobbing off, and gave Kendall no choice. There is a massive difference between challenging decisions and calling the ref a joke (an abbreviated version of what turned a yellow to a red I believe). If a saints player had done it I would have had no issue with the ref standing a player down like that; it’s a slippery slope in letting comments like that go and it turning into football.
And as a final point on “Saints got penalties close to our line; we only got penalties coming out of our own half”; I could debate the pros and cons of each to be honest, but I think the BBC put stats up half way through the second half that showed Saints had had 4 times more play the balls in Hulls half than vv. You tend to win penalties where you have the ball and Hull had the ball in their own half a lot and Saints had the ball in Hulls half a lot.
I get all fans see biases and inconsistency with refs; the Saints fans have a particular conspiracy with the disciplinary but generally I think that gives far too much credence to the RFL. I totally accept my counter points are a very Saints centric view of things as well, and that the reality is somewhere between the two of us. There were mistakes in Kendall’s game (yep, Batchelor did shoulder charge Fash, should have been a penalty) but they cut both ways, and in the big moments did well enough. Kendall didn’t lose you the game; Griffin did.
Maybe you should have held your tongue a bit longer!
seems the panel found no wrong in the Fash incident, like most knew!
Magic Superbeetle wrote:I’ve held my tongue in this thread as fans are entitled to their opinion; but what you have written is beyond the pale.
Let’s start with the Fash incident. It’s a red card every day of the week. Direct contact with the head with the shoulder whilst prone in a tackle. I don’t think it was a particularly dirty play, but Fash went for an aggressive, dominant tackle and got it completely wrong, leaving a player stone cold K.O.’d. I truly don’t understand how Kendall got to on report; because either he’s penalising contact with the head and it’s a red card, or it’s a knock on, there’s really no inbetween. Those calling “oh the ref shouldn’t have sent Griffin off for the sake of the game”; that good grace was used for that tackle.
After we took the 2; you knocked the ball out on the third tackle which Kendall ignored and you took the ascendancy.
Then you have your second try which Kendall sent up as a try; when McIntosh knocked the ball forwards into Mata’utias forearm and it then went backwards to Savelio, which was ignored/ not overruled due to the silly guess work rules refs need.
And then you get to the insanity that was the Griffin incident. Kendall told him to walk away, he kept gobbing off so he sin binned him. He still kept gobbing off, and gave Kendall no choice. There is a massive difference between challenging decisions and calling the ref a joke (an abbreviated version of what turned a yellow to a red I believe). If a saints player had done it I would have had no issue with the ref standing a player down like that; it’s a slippery slope in letting comments like that go and it turning into football.
And as a final point on “Saints got penalties close to our line; we only got penalties coming out of our own half”; I could debate the pros and cons of each to be honest, but I think the BBC put stats up half way through the second half that showed Saints had had 4 times more play the balls in Hulls half than vv. You tend to win penalties where you have the ball and Hull had the ball in their own half a lot and Saints had the ball in Hulls half a lot.
I get all fans see biases and inconsistency with refs; the Saints fans have a particular conspiracy with the disciplinary but generally I think that gives far too much credence to the RFL. I totally accept my counter points are a very Saints centric view of things as well, and that the reality is somewhere between the two of us. There were mistakes in Kendall’s game (yep, Batchelor did shoulder charge Fash, should have been a penalty) but they cut both ways, and in the big moments did well enough. Kendall didn’t lose you the game; Griffin did.
Maybe you should have held your tongue a bit longer!
seems the panel found no wrong in the Fash incident, like most knew!
Irregs#16 wrote:Fash didn't move his body really. Percival had hold of him, and Taylor controlled the player going to ground. Fash cannot move his position.
exactly, worse case scenario was a fine, but even the panel could see he was in a position of no fault of his own, makes Wilkin and Peacock look a bit foolish too claiming it was a red all day!
Joined: Mar 14 2003 Posts: 25776 Location: Back in Hull.
Grade F is laughable, unless he said something racist orvalong them lines, it's really excessive, the fact he will get more than someone who headbutted someone twice or a two spear tackles that could have broke a players neck so what a joke the disciplinary is.
Cator - No tripping motion was made. So why did they get a penalty for it? A lot of the time the MRP minutes show up how many decisions the refs really get wrong, bit rarely do they get dropped.
Dave K. wrote:Grade F is laughable, unless he said something racist orvalong them lines, it's really excessive, the fact he will get more than someone who headbutted someone twice or a two spear tackles that could have broke a players neck so what a joke the disciplinary is.
Be interesting to see the transcript. I am sure the club have requested the audio from the referee mic
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
