Ridiculous decision to charge him, great hit. Hope Anderson shuts up now the muppet.

Still though, they missed Crabtree's hit

A relief that Ellis is free to play Saturday, but ignoring this single case and looking at the wider issue it's becoming a farce.



Sat and watched Wakefield last night there were two or three really decent hits that immediately had the muppet show up on the gantry saying "is that a shoulder? is that allowed?" As it's very rare you see something truly malicious in RL what we're basically doing is focusing on a series of tackles, mistimed or otherwise, and deeming some worthy of nothing, some worthy of charge and some worthy of a ban. Essentially they're all the same challenge give or take. Absolutely nothing between Crabtree's and Ellis' hit on Sunday, one charged and one not, neither guilty.



Some other random thoughts...



1 - Does any other sport do this? By that I mean does any other sport fundamentally change the rules of the game season on season. Sometimes it's a total change, sometimes it's something we're focusing on more, but either way it results in profound changes from one season to the next. We're currently playing very different rugby league from the rugby league we were playing 18 months ago - you could shoulder charge then and you can't now. So let's say 2 years ago your club spent a lot of money on a Sam Moa, a Gareth Hock, a Gareth Ellis who is known for these big, aggressive hits and gave them a four year contract. We're now in a different sport, where their main strength is illegal. Watford have just signed Lewis McGugan from Nottingham Forest who is known mainly for scoring 8-12 goals a season from about 30 yards out. If football suddenly said you can only score goals from inside the penalty box, then McGugan's impact would be seriously limited, and Watford wouldn't have paid him what they've agreed to. Same thing if cricket restricted the use of spin bowling, suddenly people like like Graham Swann are useless. Why every year are we making changes to the rules. I remember a few years ago it was the quality of the PTB we decided to focus on, and suddenly you've got Ganson running round gleefully awarding 18 penalties in a televised game for incorrect PTB, and then it's dropped in favour of something else months later. The game is (was) fine, stop faffing about with it.



2 - We already had a rule for this dangerous shot to the head. We had Sam Moa sent off against London last season (which, by the by, I thought was a great tackle) which suggests that shoulder charges to the head were illegal last season. So why a sudden clamp down or clarification? We already had a rule for this, why have we needed to get so over the top about it to the point where every great hit in a game is surrounded in controversy.



3 - Big hits are every bit as exciting for the supporters as flowing passing moves, and listening to what the ex and current players are saying they're hating all of this and the game's going soft. Who exactly is in favour of this new rule? The players don't like it, the supporters don't like it....

How that line reminded me of your chairman moaninf with the HDM headline "stop taking the mickey" all about us signing Paea, then suddenly Mickey Dobbo goes too, so we now know your chair was fighting to keep his little squad



stop taking the mickey, best ever

Was never a bad challenge and the RFL make themselves look fools by charging Ellis and then finding him not guilty, unlikely it would have been looked at without Anderson's rant, and this on the back of Poore's spear tackle v Wakefield not even being cited.



Crabtree's late tackle / charge on Miller was worse and should have been a penalty to FC IMO

Maybe, just maybe, there was method in the madness. Charge him, because the allegation was made by Anderson, and others. Then find him Not Guilty. It now makes Anderson's rant, and name calling look completely unjustified, and clears the way for him to be charged.

Quote Gerrum on side ref="Gerrum on side ref"Was never a bad challenge and the RFL make themselves look fools by charging Ellis and then finding him not guilty, unlikely it would have been looked at without Anderson's rant, and this on the back of Poore's spear tackle v Wakefield not even being cited. Crabtree's late tackle / charge on Miller was worse and should have been a penalty to FC IMO'" Which the RFL looked at and found nothing wrong with it at all www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4613

Quote Gerrum on side ref="Gerrum on side ref"Was never a bad challenge and the RFL make themselves look fools by charging Ellis and then finding him not guilty, unlikely it would have been looked at without Anderson's rant, and this on the back of Poore's spear tackle v Wakefield not even being cited. Crabtree's late tackle / charge on Miller was worse and should have been a penalty to FC IMO'" Which the RFL looked at and found nothing wrong with it at all www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4613

Quote Durham Giant="Durham Giant"Which the RFL looked at and found nothing wrong with it at all www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4613'" TBH at the time I thought he'd turned his body when Miller kicked the ball. As you naturally do when a ball comes flying towards you but I wasn't sure during the follow through wether he'd made contact with his shoulder or not. I personally have no problem with that decision.

Quote Durham Giant="Durham Giant"Which the RFL looked at and found nothing wrong with it at all www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4613'" TBH at the time I thought he'd turned his body when Miller kicked the ball. As you naturally do when a ball comes flying towards you but I wasn't sure during the follow through wether he'd made contact with his shoulder or not. I personally have no problem with that decision.

By the letter of the laws and interpretation this year, i though Crabtrees was a shoulder charge, but no more than a penalty.



L

Challenge must have been worse than first thought......

poor bloke is obviously concussed by the vicious premeditated attack to the noggin.

Not so much an innocuous challenge as a knock you out challenge.