By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
@officiallydale have tweeted that the goals will be on YouTube from midday.
Two things arising from these 3m 28s: Did Dawson hit the first as well as the second fifty-yard pass to set up Done's goals? Second, what a blundering fool the ref was: definitely a few feet outside the box when contact took place, and it isn't even certain that a foul was intended (is Bennett in the background indicating that the Orient player dived?)
Two things arising from these 3m 28s: Did Dawson hit the first as well as the second fifty-yard pass to set up Done's goals? Second, what a blundering fool the ref was: definitely a few feet outside the box when contact took place, and it isn't even certain that a foul was intended (is Bennett in the background indicating that the Orient player dived?)
Totally agree that the penalty decision is a bad one. However, the blame lies with the AR, who would have had the square on view. Could also argue the intent (accidental) and whether was contact. Is there a review? Would he still have got 3 games if he had just deliberately kicked him? Something to learn from Aussie RL if not (Do not know if they do same in England) Ref penalises the offence, and puts it on "review". A panel then scrutinises the offence, and decides on the guilt, and severity of the ban if found guilty.
If he kicked him it would be violent conduct and a three match ban. As it stands Eastham is banned for one game.
I don't like the on report system. I've seen it used badly in Super League as a cop out for decision making. Players get banned for subsistent games, yet the team who the offense has been committed against gets no benefit.
Totally agree that the penalty decision is a bad one. However, the blame lies with the AR, who would have had the square on view. Could also argue the intent (accidental) and whether was contact. Is there a review? Would he still have got 3 games if he had just deliberately kicked him? Something to learn from Aussie RL if not (Do not know if they do same in England) Ref penalises the offence, and puts it on "review". A panel then scrutinises the offence, and decides on the guilt, and severity of the ban if found guilty.
I've posted elsewhere that he'll be banned for one game, not three.
Can't see a review happening. It's not a definite error and is open to opinion and interpretation.
When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf?
If he kicked him it would be violent conduct and a three match ban. As it stands Eastham is banned for one game.
I don't like the on report system. I've seen it used badly in Super League as a cop out for decision making. Players get banned for subsistent games, yet the team who the offense has been committed against gets no benefit.
Thanks for the info, and a fair point made. Is there a review though? Could say that Barnsley benefit as our first choice defender is not available due to a cheating Orient player(If it can be proven)
Thanks for the info, and a fair point made. Is there a review though? Could say that Barnsley benefit as our first choice defender is not available due to a cheating Orient player(If it can be proven)
How can it be proven?
Eastham has been superb, but he came into the team because of an injury to Lancashire, who, with O'Connell, are more than capable enough.
Will we be complaining if Benik Afobe is sent-off for MK Dons on Saturday and is suspended against Dale (assuming it isn't postponed)?
When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
