>>Quite right. It seems every man and his dog is jumping on the 8 matches is
>too severe bandwagon. The players union ought to hold fire until they have a
>That's because it is.
Bollocks. It would have been intersting to see who the players union would have been representing if Cowie had been put out of the game with a broken jaw.
>>Even the press are at it. Martyn Sadler went on at length about it in his
>weekly column in league express. Its the biggest load of ***I have ever
>>The gist of the article, for those who don't buy the paper, is that RL HQ
>cocked up by banning Goulding and fining the clubs because it brought
>>His description of Gouldings tackle is amazing as well. He says "when
>Goulding stuck his arm out". Pardon me but I seem to remember him winding it
>He also said that it was wrong for the RFL to start altering the length of
>bans without informing the players.
Altering the length from what? Since when has there been a de-facto length of ban for a high tackle?
A few seasons ago, as I keep saying, it was an automatic 8 match ban for a high tackle.
Since they gave up on that scheme I doubt if any player knows what he is going to get for a deliberate foul. From Gouldings face when he walked I don't think he was expecting a two match ban.
>The whole point of banning is to serve as a deterrant.
>If Goulding had known BEFORE the game that 8 match bans were going to
>be handed out for high tackles - he wouldn't have hit him.
You give the man too much credit. When the mandatory 8 matches was the rule it still did not stop players from going for the head and being banned.
>>No doubt his ban will be reduced today. Pathetic.
>Oh boo hoo hoo!
>Notice the "Simply the best" tag has gone buddy - wonder why?
I was wondering how long it would take for your brain to engage first gear and spot that. Ive upgraded to a new aol client and forgot to swich signatures back on.
It shall return ;-).
Would you like the Shaun Edwards for PM bit as well?