Which makes appealing a poor decision.
Liam watts.
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 16:17
- Contact:
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 7315
- Joined: 07 Jul 2006, 16:29
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
Absolutely
-
- League One Player
- Posts: 2986
- Joined: 21 Dec 2014, 00:40
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
It’s not often I’m in 100% agreement with you Notts but, yep, very poor decision. We all knew the outcome
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1723
- Joined: 05 Jan 2021, 17:59
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
I am aware that on many previous occasions an appeal has resulted in an increased ban but more often than not it's because the original ban was reduced for the likes of a previously good disciplinary record and appealing ruins that record.derbystiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 11:44 It’s not often I’m in 100% agreement with you Notts but, yep, very poor decision. We all knew the outcome
But, on this occasion, it appears his ban has been increased because the panel feel Watts has been "frivolous".
For Christ's sake, there's blokes knocking hell out of each other every game and you ban someone for being frivolous.
Re: Liam watts.
I can just see Cullen and one or two others on the panel strutting around thinking there Gods gift to Rugby League
Your never going to get fairness in RL from top to bottom it's biased or corrupt and as been for a long time
Your never going to get fairness in RL from top to bottom it's biased or corrupt and as been for a long time
The measure of who we are is what we do with what we have
Vince Lombardi
Vince Lombardi
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1723
- Joined: 05 Jan 2021, 17:59
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
The metaphoric question is, who police's the police?
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 16:17
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
I've said that I thought the tackle deserved a ban and that I thought we were naïve to appeal in the context of the upcoming fixtures, given that we know the potential for the ban to be increased.
However....
I do question the system.
Firstly, 'frivolous' is subjective. What is frivolous to one person isn't to another. In that respect, it's not really something that can be 'proven' - it might have been frivolous in the eyes of the panel, but completely justified from the club's perspective.
Secondly, it seems like a system designed to shut down challenge. I'm never convinced by the fairness of an appeals system that can make the outcome worse than the original outcome. It is a systematic 'powerplay'. If the panel thought the incident was worth a one-game ban for foul play, that's fine; but banning a player for appealing that decision is essentially suspending him/her for nothing more than disagreeing with the outcome, and using the process put in place to do so.
Thirdly, I don't think it's good for the game. As a sport, we aren't in a position where we can have our elite players sat in the stands for something as frivolous as using the established appeals process.
The panel thought his appeal was frivolous; I think banning him for appealing it is frivolous as it doesn't seem to be have much of a purpose other than to give the DC a sense of power. It's certainly not in the best interests of the sport to have players missing games for daring to use a process that clubs are entitled to follow.
However....
I do question the system.
Firstly, 'frivolous' is subjective. What is frivolous to one person isn't to another. In that respect, it's not really something that can be 'proven' - it might have been frivolous in the eyes of the panel, but completely justified from the club's perspective.
Secondly, it seems like a system designed to shut down challenge. I'm never convinced by the fairness of an appeals system that can make the outcome worse than the original outcome. It is a systematic 'powerplay'. If the panel thought the incident was worth a one-game ban for foul play, that's fine; but banning a player for appealing that decision is essentially suspending him/her for nothing more than disagreeing with the outcome, and using the process put in place to do so.
Thirdly, I don't think it's good for the game. As a sport, we aren't in a position where we can have our elite players sat in the stands for something as frivolous as using the established appeals process.
The panel thought his appeal was frivolous; I think banning him for appealing it is frivolous as it doesn't seem to be have much of a purpose other than to give the DC a sense of power. It's certainly not in the best interests of the sport to have players missing games for daring to use a process that clubs are entitled to follow.
-
old cas lass Verified
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 23095
- Joined: 26 Dec 2007, 14:29
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
Does anyone think Liam should bring the players Union into this.
Because imo it seems like discrimination to me.
Liam was unset about a one game ban.
God knows how he’s feeling about 2.
Do the RFL not think of players mental health.
How things like this can affect people.
This wasn’t even a ban never mind 2.
Unfairness drives me mad.
Someone as to start standing up to ridiculous rulings.
Because imo it seems like discrimination to me.
Liam was unset about a one game ban.
God knows how he’s feeling about 2.
Do the RFL not think of players mental health.
How things like this can affect people.
This wasn’t even a ban never mind 2.
Unfairness drives me mad.
Someone as to start standing up to ridiculous rulings.
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 16:17
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
Discrimination based on what, exactly?old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:40 Does anyone think Liam should bring the players Union into this.
Because imo it seems like discrimination to me.
Liam was unset about a one game ban.
God knows how he’s feeling about 2.
Do the RFL not think of players mental health.
How things like this can affect people.
This wasn’t even a ban never mind 2.
Unfairness drives me mad.
Someone as to start standing up to ridiculous rulings.
-
old cas lass Verified
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 23095
- Joined: 26 Dec 2007, 14:29
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
If two people do the same offence.nottinghamtiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:45Discrimination based on what, exactly?old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:40 Does anyone think Liam should bring the players Union into this.
Because imo it seems like discrimination to me.
Liam was unset about a one game ban.
God knows how he’s feeling about 2.
Do the RFL not think of players mental health.
How things like this can affect people.
This wasn’t even a ban never mind 2.
Unfairness drives me mad.
Someone as to start standing up to ridiculous rulings.
One gets let off the other doesn’t, to me that’s discrimination.
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 16:17
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
That's just injustice.old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:24If two people do the same offence.nottinghamtiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:45Discrimination based on what, exactly?old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:40 Does anyone think Liam should bring the players Union into this.
Because imo it seems like discrimination to me.
Liam was unset about a one game ban.
God knows how he’s feeling about 2.
Do the RFL not think of players mental health.
How things like this can affect people.
This wasn’t even a ban never mind 2.
Unfairness drives me mad.
Someone as to start standing up to ridiculous rulings.
One gets let off the other doesn’t, to me that’s discrimination.
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1723
- Joined: 05 Jan 2021, 17:59
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
Treating people differently isn't discrimination it's just unfair. Treating them differently because of race, colour, gender, sexual preference, religious beliefs and so on is discrimination. Therefore, treating one 6' 4" white, British, hetrosexual (guessing), male (guessing) different to another matching the same description, isn't discrimination.old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:24If two people do the same offence.nottinghamtiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:45Discrimination based on what, exactly?old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:40 Does anyone think Liam should bring the players Union into this.
Because imo it seems like discrimination to me.
Liam was unset about a one game ban.
God knows how he’s feeling about 2.
Do the RFL not think of players mental health.
How things like this can affect people.
This wasn’t even a ban never mind 2.
Unfairness drives me mad.
Someone as to start standing up to ridiculous rulings.
One gets let off the other doesn’t, to me that’s discrimination.
-
old cas lass Verified
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 23095
- Joined: 26 Dec 2007, 14:29
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
Another word for discrimination is favouritism.nottinghamtiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:39That's just injustice.old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:24If two people do the same offence.nottinghamtiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:45Discrimination based on what, exactly?old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:40 Does anyone think Liam should bring the players Union into this.
Because imo it seems like discrimination to me.
Liam was unset about a one game ban.
God knows how he’s feeling about 2.
Do the RFL not think of players mental health.
How things like this can affect people.
This wasn’t even a ban never mind 2.
Unfairness drives me mad.
Someone as to start standing up to ridiculous rulings.
One gets let off the other doesn’t, to me that’s discrimination.
How many have said on here bigger clubs are favoured more than us small town clubs.
And yes it was a massive injustice.
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 16:17
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
To be discriminated against, somebody has to be treated differently based on a protected characteristic (age; gender reassignment; being married or in a civil partnership; being pregnant or on maternity leave; disability; race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation).old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:44Another word for discrimination is favouritism.nottinghamtiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:39That's just injustice.old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:24If two people do the same offence.nottinghamtiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:45Discrimination based on what, exactly?old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 13:40 Does anyone think Liam should bring the players Union into this.
Because imo it seems like discrimination to me.
Liam was unset about a one game ban.
God knows how he’s feeling about 2.
Do the RFL not think of players mental health.
How things like this can affect people.
This wasn’t even a ban never mind 2.
Unfairness drives me mad.
Someone as to start standing up to ridiculous rulings.
One gets let off the other doesn’t, to me that’s discrimination.
How many have said on here bigger clubs are favoured more than us small town clubs.
And yes it was a massive injustice.
I wish we could add 'playing for Cas' to the list, but I'm afraid it's not there as yet.
Re: Liam watts.
Couldn't being a tiger be described as a belief, get em on technicalitiesnottinghamtiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:51To be discriminated against, somebody has to be treated differently based on a protected characteristic (age; gender reassignment; being married or in a civil partnership; being pregnant or on maternity leave; disability; race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin; religion or belief; sex; sexual orientation).old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:44Another word for discrimination is favouritism.nottinghamtiger wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:39That's just injustice.old cas lass wrote: ↑12 May 2021, 14:24If two people do the same offence.
One gets let off the other doesn’t, to me that’s discrimination.
How many have said on here bigger clubs are favoured more than us small town clubs.
And yes it was a massive injustice.
I wish we could add 'playing for Cas' to the list, but I'm afraid it's not there as yet.
what doesn't kill me simply makes me...stranger.
Re: Liam watts.
This guy!!
removed post it again and you will join them on a 48 hour ban read the AUP
Re: Liam watts.
Ban stems from years of cas not defending themselves with top lawyers like wigan do. You would only need to show you will not get treated unfairly once or twice with decent legal team and message will sink in that were no longer doormats
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1723
- Joined: 05 Jan 2021, 17:59
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1676
- Joined: 20 Jun 2016, 08:47
- Contact:
Re: Liam watts.
Definately!FIat Capper wrote: ↑13 May 2021, 12:00I'd love AC-12 to poke their noses in and around the RFL.
Re: Liam watts.
New ban rules :0 for humility,one for flippancy,arrogance,jocularity,laconicism,mendacity ,vénality and sloth ;two for sarcasm and disdain,Life for two fingers
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Google [Bot] and 48 guests