So basically a player getting sent off late in a game is not punishment?

He's not even been off the field the amount of time he'd get for a lesser offence that warranted a sin bin

It depends on what they charge him with if its the same as this

[urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=1414[/url

Given its a year since he got two match suspension for almost the same thing, I would expect he could even get three or more.

Thats quality that Agar blames Craig Hall for it

Didnt Jake Webster get sent off in the last 5 mins or so at Bradford was found guilty and got sending off sufficient?????



Tansey's previous is likely to be his biggest problem.

Indeed he did, because of his good record and the fact he really did nothing wrong

It's far more likely you'll see a ban for a red card in the 75th minute rather than one after say 5 minutes, especially for a spear tackle

So your actually claiming he attempted to seriously injure the player? Then have the nerve to claim someone is embarrasing themselves through bias? Brilliant.

Either way he was found guilty!

I agree there will be more emphasis on a player missing a large chunk of a game going towards a ban but I think with the Webster case they have shown previous at the disciplinary commitee - technically Websters punishment was less then a sin binning for a 'guilty' charge.

That said Tansey's record will be his biggest downfall but he could easily have cost his team the game last night which I beleive may be taken into consideration.

Yes, i'd imagine picking someone up and dropping them on their head is an attempt to injure someone.

Maybe but then again SOS is the easy way out for the disciplinary rather than find a player not guilty which would then mean they admit the ref got it wrong.

And with Brian Mcdermott having a say about this when Sykes got banned for a similar incident not long ago I think that will work against you.

So he couldn't have been attempting to tackle the player and just got it wrong? Maybe you were dropped on your head as a baby? I'm sure your mummy didn't mean it though.

You are now assuming something which is incorrect. Morgan himself said Webster had made more tackles then usual in this particular game and was probably 'tired' when he wrapped his considerable arm around the Bulls players head.



The report clearly states that he made an illegal challenge.

To suggest Tansey deliberately intended to injure the Crusaders player in a premeditated illegal challenge is just wrong. Maybe the colour of his jersey is clouding your judgement?

Quite true,but as Tansey ran at the player and upended him,I would argue it was not a deliberate spear tackle.

Thats ok then, He won't get banned then much like you don't for an accidental high tackle.

Don't you worry, I didn't pay a penny for my ticket.

You wouldnt admit to it even if you did!

Not at all, he's a good attacking player is Jordan. I just don't like to see people dumped on their heads in such a way. If it was accidental then so be it but I would argue it's difficult to accidently drop someone on their head and I hate to see any lifting tackles take place.

Why is he lifting him in the first place when he's the last line of defence? Surely a copybook tackle would have sufficed??

Probably with the intention of dominating the tackle and winning his defence a few more seconds.

It was a tackle that went badly wrong for him I dont beleive for one second he planned to drop the Crusaders player on his head and his immediate remorse and apology probably backs that up.

Illegal = yes
Deliberate = no

Probably not, no tbh. But on this occasion, having to sit 10 yards from Kath was payment enough for me!

How was it a late tackle he still had the ball

I'm afraid people need to get their B&W specs off for this one.

As Agar has said on the radio (and has also said in the past to the RFL), the spear tackle (or "dumping" as he calls it) is the piece of foul play that ABOVE ALL OTHERS needs ridding from the game. The reason being you can break a players neck.

Tansey may well have not intended to dump him on his head. However, in order to do so, he must have at some stage intentionally lifted the player's legs. Then at that point he may have lost control of the tackle resulting in him being tipped on his head.

When a player runs through and is stopped by the opposing full back head on there is no way that through simple "momentum" a player could end up being dumped to the ground like that head first. He must have lifted his legs and then at that point some kind of "momentum" might take (dangerously) over. Also don't forget there was no one else in the tackle to complicate things.

That Tansey lost control of the tackle doesn't absolve him of guilt. It has to be the tackler's responsibility to control the tackle, it really can't be the responsibility of anyone else!

Lastly he already has form for this, from last year. At that disciplinary hearing, the club, having decided it was bad, admitted the charge and were happy to accept a 2 match ban. Unfortunately he hasn't learnt his lesson...

Quote ="smudgersmith"EL CAMO - did you get a good view from the North Stand? Perhaps is was a similar view as the writer for your website [url=http://www.crusadersrfl.com/report.php?id=3217388sent off Hull’s Jordan Tansey in the 75th-minute for a late tackle on Clinton Schifcofske[/url'" Smudger just because a report appears on a website it doesn't mean it was written by somebody on that website. For your information, the report was a neutral report and is available on Superleague's own website, I daresay you will find this report syndicated in various newspapers too. Maybe if you broaden your horizons and read articles other than from your own back door, you will become less blinkered in life, and realise the world is quite a big place and not all black and white and smelling of fish. For your further info here is the original article: www.superleague.co.uk/report.php?id=3217388

Quote ="smudgersmith"EL CAMO - did you get a good view from the North Stand? Perhaps is was a similar view as the writer for your website [url=http://www.crusadersrfl.com/report.php?id=3217388sent off Hull’s Jordan Tansey in the 75th-minute for a late tackle on Clinton Schifcofske[/url'" Smudger just because a report appears on a website it doesn't mean it was written by somebody on that website. For your information, the report was a neutral report and is available on Superleague's own website, I daresay you will find this report syndicated in various newspapers too. Maybe if you broaden your horizons and read articles other than from your own back door, you will become less blinkered in life, and realise the world is quite a big place and not all black and white and smelling of fish. For your further info here is the original article: www.superleague.co.uk/report.php?id=3217388

he didnt do it with the intention of injuring him FOOL,

it was reckless and shouldnt have happened, a red card was correct IMO, but to say tansey "meant" to do it is just plain stupid and your anti hull thoughts are there to see.

Tansey is a player that cannot tackle. it's why he is not a fullback, in my opinion. However, when a player isa running at 100% speed and gets tackled, then yeah, it can go wrong for the runner. happens all the time including to me. Tansey simply made a tackle with no malice or any intent to hurt whatsoever. Yeah he landed on his head, it's called Rugby League. No spear, no intent, pure speed and motion. You are just being an idiot. You know what happened so why not just try being objective. Not like he stamped on a prone innocents face is it.