could miss the semi being charged Grade B dangerous throw. could be a huge loss disappointed to say the least..... www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/30 ... er-charged

could miss the semi being charged Grade B dangerous throw. could be a huge loss disappointed to say the least..... www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/30 ... er-charged

Quote tigerman1231="tigerman1231"could miss the semi being charged Grade B dangerous throw. could be a huge loss disappointed to say the least..... www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/30 ... er-charged'" That's all we need.

Quote tigerman1231="tigerman1231"could miss the semi being charged Grade B dangerous throw. could be a huge loss disappointed to say the least..... www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/30 ... er-charged'" That's all we need.

Had a feeling he would be pulled for it given his previous....had it been Dixon for example he would have got a warning.

The thing is he had no need to do it...the game was won.

Get ready for a Tuesday double whammy....Carney will get 2 games and Weller's appeal will fail.

Widnes will be rubbing their hands over this....

I know Carney will be a loss to us but remember we beat Wigan without him , James Clare will do the job for us

Delboy66

Millington is the biggest blow...probably the most consistent forward for us this year.

Carney is the 3rd bit of bad news we have had over the week...well they say it goes in three's.

Still have confidence we'll win, just gives somebody else a chance to play. At the end of the day, Daryl will have them firing. Can't wait for the match!

Duke St, having previous has nothing to do with it, it is either guilty or not guilty. Even if Dixon had done it if deemed guilty he would be looked at. It only comes into play if after tried. If your guilty a previous offender would get more than one who has a good record. It's like pulling someone in for spitting in the street because he has a record for assault or malicious wounding or not pulling someone in for mugging an old lady because he has no 'previous'. You cannot say 'Well it does not really warrant a citing or suspension, but he has previous so we will bring him in, or alternatively 'It was bad enough to warrant action being taken, but he has had no previous, so we'll leave it alone. If it is deemed bad or illegal, you get charged whether you have previous or not and then it comes into play, and someone who has previous gets looked at less favourably. If the tackle is not worthy of even a citing or not illegal, you can have 'previous' as long as your arm, it should not make any difference.

The tackle to me appears to be no different to the one Paul Aiton made against Salford, which also resulted in just a penalty being given. (not saying for definite that it is). If this is the case, the fact is that Aiton's was not deemed bad, illegal or serious enough for a citing or further action, and so on that basis neither should Carney's, irregardless whether he has previous or not.

Like you say that will be our third big of bad news, and lets hope that's it, and we get a big slice of good news on Sunday tea time.

Hep Cahill...
Player does make late contact with opponent using illegal Shoulder Charge technique. Penalty sufficient.

Step forward James Clare...do us proud (again)!

So - we are are playing tiddlywinks after all.

Sunday let's get 'Tiddly' and laugh at The RFL 'Winkers'.