1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Andrew Ryan

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by fLIP, Aug 2, 2007.

  1. fLIP

    fLIP UFO Hunter

    +1,324 /37
    What's everyone's thoughts of his high tackle charge last night.

    I don't have a problem with it. It was probably as accidental as they come.
  2. Garts

    Garts Well-Known Member

    +843 /25
    I agree he was falling and it was a accident but most high tackles are accidents. Would Matai have got off with the same defence for his tackle on Ben Smith? Smith was also falling.

    If they apply this judgement going forward I have no issue but we all know that will not happen.
  3. fLIP

    fLIP UFO Hunter

    +1,324 /37
    Yeah it is a tough one. No one really means a high tackle, well I hope not anyway.

    I think the thing with Andrews tackle was he looked to be going in around stomach/lower chest height and when Ryles buckled over and without sounding stupid, 'head butt his arm' more than anything.

    I found it more accidental than a player jumping into a tackle, going for a tackle over the shoulders and cleaning a bloke up. Those are careless tackles, Ryan's in my opinion was neither.
  4. Chip and Chase

    Chip and Chase True Supporter Staff Member Administrator Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +8,579 /80
    Yes, but how do you define careless or reckless ?? If a player is going into a tackle with one or more team mates, than is it not negligent of them to not consider that the actions of the other tacklers may result in the player "falling". If you are working on a thin margin of six inches (distance between chin and upper chest) than are you not been careless, or at worst reckless ??

    Fair enough when a player gets chopped down around the legs and his body drops a couple of feet, but when they get snapped in the midriff and buckle over only slightly, where is the duty of care ?

    Just wondering why they have gradings of careless and reckless if they don't apply to circumstances like this.
  5. Kiwi Eagle

    Kiwi Eagle Moderator Staff Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +3,866 /65
    Without debating the mertis of the tackel,I thought it was ridiculous he got off.

    If it was Morley, Wiki, Matai, Gallen etc, they would have been sent and probably looking at 4+ weeks.

    The 1 thing lacking in the whole system is consistency
  6. byso

    byso Well-Known Member

    +85 /0
    There was nothing in it. He should've got off.
  7. gomanly

    gomanly Member

    +0 /0
    it helps when you have a former chairman from the panel working on your defence, it was BS that he got off, it deserved at least one week if not two, what about the tigers player who copped one week for the "accidental" head plant where the cowboys player rolled forward off the ball and onto his head.

Share This Page