Warrington Wolves • TV games (not Wire)
CW8 wrote:
I suppose that's true enough. It doesn't really sit right with me that an unfortunate pkayer who receives a head shot could potentially be missing for 2 matches (or maybe even 3 around Easter time) whilst the opposition player who caused it gets to carry on playing.
To be honest, I have no problem with the way the welsby incident was dealt with, so long as all incidents are treated that way through the season. My only real gripe with the judiciary panel is the lack of consistency.
They've made a good start IMO. Everyone knows the difference between a genuinely malicious or very severe impact and the kind of unintentional or low risk stuff technicalitiies that was deemed worthy of a ban in the last few seasons. I think the overzealous approach led to a lot of hysteria from fans, as they were micro analysing every collision in the hope of finding something that could get a rival player banned. People were spending the week raging about who got banned and who didn't and there was frustration everywhere. Also means we get to see players play the game rather than watch it from the stands, which should mean a better product that gets people talking about the rugby not the disciplinary and appeals process. If it does result in players being more reckless they'll have to look at it again, but hopefully it won't.
Statistics: Posted by Saddened! — Wed Mar 01, 2023 12:56 pm — Replies 624 — Views 115014