Joined: Aug 02 2002 Posts: 7302 Location: Wakefield but near to Leeds!
There`s only 2 reasons they fail on appeal. One there`s video evidence somewhere that shows it and two the word of the TJ carries more weight than the player.
It's an odd one. I didn't see a punch live and it wasn't obvious on the sky footage. That in itself wouldn't be remarkable except that McDonnell seemed to be in frame throughout.
"Look, I'd never use injuries as an excuse..." Daryl Powell
Simmo71 wrote:You can accept the sending off in a way, because maybe the officials didn't have a clear view. But surely there has to be conclusive evidence for him to be banned?? If he is honest with the club and is adamant he didn't throw a punch, then we have to appeal. Then surely the MRP has to show the evidence?
That’s the sensible way to look at it. A refs call in the heat of the moment with everything going on you can accept, but surely now if they’ve banned him they have absolute evidence.
leedsbarmyarmy wrote:And I’m not saying they should, just pointing out that someone prob did punch Lomax, and the linesman has said it was McDonnell
Blood on the face in a contact sport does not mean that someone probably did punch him.
As has been said elsewhere, if the assertion is that he did punch him, and that assertion has been made twice now (one on the night and again today) and he has been banned on that basis, then the RFL simply has to show the evidence. Leeds appeal is simple. Show us the punch
Joined: Feb 26 2002 Posts: 9576 Location: anywhere, literally...
If you watched the post match interview that Lomax did, he had a puncture wound just below his bottom lip on the right side of his face. That could have been a split from a punch, given the shape of it something has hit him in the face and pushed one of his teeth through his lip. Could easily have been done when he made the tackle if he got his head in too low and hit a hip for example.
Given all the footage of the incident, we should be banning people on what there is evidence of, not what someone with a restricted view says they saw.
It's not how much talent you've got, it's what you do with it that counts.
To be fair, I'm sure there's lots of footage of it. Sky only showed 1 replay, but they don't show replays of potential violent conduct or injuries anymore, but I'm sure the judiciary gets given access to them.
Jack Burton wrote:To be fair, I'm sure there's lots of footage of it. Sky only showed 1 replay, but they don't show replays of potential violent conduct or injuries anymore, but I'm sure the judiciary gets given access to them.
Jack Burton wrote:To be fair, I'm sure there's lots of footage of it. Sky only showed 1 replay, but they don't show replays of potential violent conduct or injuries anymore, but I'm sure the judiciary gets given access to them.
That's cool but it's just not true is it? Sky shows a replay of every single injury, they even show the replays at the ground if the games on sky. Oh, and they showed a replay of the scuffle too so not sure what you're basing that on?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 117 guests
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