... don't you think the ref should have said, [i"Sam, I know you weren't trying to attack Tom Lineham's eyes - but I'm sending you off because [uYOU ATTACKED TOM LINEHAM'S EYES![/u".[/i

I mean, refs don't let someone off for attacking someone's jaw with the elbow because [i"it's accidental"[/i.

I don't think Tautai meant to dump the Hull player on his head....but he still dumped him on his head.

Accidental yes, but still too serious under the "duty of care" to other players. Likewise the Powell incident. Should be punished just to teach him and others they need to be more careful.

Still it's James Child though so he'll probably get rewarded with another 2 SL games to ref next week just like he's getting this weekend whilst promising Joe Cobb doesn't get any Top 8 game this weekend.

Still must be because he's "earned it"

It didn't look good on the replays. Definitely "careless" shall we say. It's not the initial contact but the apparent "grab" with the fingers that's the concerning part.
As you say, plenty of other offences don't take intent into account.
I can see why they didn't send him off, but I'm at a loss as to how it wasn't given as a penalty.

Don't do it, Printer. Leave it on the original thread.

If a player leaps at an opponent and connects cleanly with an elbow-point to the jaw (forcing said opponent to leave the field with a serious injury) - how often does the ref not issue a red and say, [i"I don't think you [uMEANT[/u to"[/i?

You appear to be bitter about something. I don't know what it is. But if you start muttering at the same time people are likely to avoid you.

I agree it didn't look good on replay. In real time, I didn't think there was much in it. I expected a yellow. No pen was crazy.

The salient point here is whether or not Powell meant to gouge Lineham's eyes - the result is he [uhas gouged Lineham's eyes.[/u

Also, I can't help feeling the SKY team were looking to excuse Powell precisely because gouging is such a universally despised act and no sane person would ever behave so reprehensibly.

But some players DO behave so reprehensibly.

It was a strange one. There's no doubt what the end result was. I believe intent has to factor in something like this, only Powell can say for sure but I don't think that is what he was trying to do. I think it was an attempt to grab the shirt that went wrong. The VR took a lot of looks at it so must have thought the same.

That said there was direct contact with the face, intentional or not it's still a penalty at the very least.

The Tautai one was a shocker. Players should have realised by now that they can't lift like that. It should have been a Red. I suppose Child had an easy cop out as there was only 7 mins left so a yellow was in effect a sending off. I'd expect a minimum grade C.

it was nasty, maybe not intentional, but nasty all the same.

looking at Powell's fingers, it appears he was looking to reef the ball out of Lineham's grasp, but he was nowhere near the ball

only Powell knows what his true intentions were, but it wasn't good was it?

as for James Child, he has a history this season and in years past to let things go that have resulted in serious injuries and lengthy bans!

Not only should fc got a penalty but didnt wigan score in their next set?

If intent is to play a role (and I don't think it should) then surely the position of his hands must be the deciding factor. Unless that's his usual technique - they're miles away from where they should be.

If something walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ... ?

They did, but that was partly due to Hull's strange policy of kicking on the 3rd tackle despite being knackered.

Lauaki's was miles worse just now against Hull KR, should have been red.

Its quite possible wigan wouldn't have scored if fc were correctly awarded a penalty


Ifs and buts, yesterday's chip paper and all but decisions like that last night and the one to day at hull kr still seems the top clubs get the rub of the green

intent should be a massive factor in deciding punishment. I remember Hock gouging a player (Warrington one i think) a few years back. He was stood up and from behind the player put his finger in the blokes eye. I don't think there was any damage but that's not the point. There was no doubt that was what he intended to do and the handful of matches he got was pitiful.

Compare that to last night where i think Powell was trying to grab the shirt, others have suggested the ball and got it wrong. I think it was accidental. i may be wrong, only Powell knows but that's how i saw it. I'm not saying it doesn't deserve punishment but it was careless rather then reckless or malicious.

How can anyone possibly KNOW intent unless a player admits it!!!
To say hock meant it but Powell didn't- you can't possibly KNOW. Your post is contradictory

Did Powell reach for the face or was he unbalanced by Lineham's fend? Just looked an unfortunate accident to me.

Tautai's was bad. He shouldn't play again this season.

Lauaki's a grub. He just shouldn't play again.

No arguemetns from me, and should cop a hefty ban for it. But RFL will probably do the standard 2 game ban

No, you can't say with absolute certainty but with some incidents you can say beyond reasonable doubt.

Can't argue with that. It was definitely accidental as far as I'm concerned (grabbing at a player while running and being fended off) but the defender has a duty of care. Powell was at best unlucky and at worst reckless, it deserved a yellow.

To be fair to Powell he probably misjudged Lineham's run due to his tiny legs.

Precisely. Which is why the case for taking intent out of the equation is put forward.

Yes!!!