Logo banned for 1 week!

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

Post Reply
watsonjm
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: Cambridge

Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by watsonjm »

Has been banned for one week for a dangerous tackle and is free to play on March 28th. He pleaded guilty

http://www.premiershiprugby.com/news/38 ... hqD5aEx.97
sapajo
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6052
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Logo

Post by sapajo »

watsonjm wrote:Has been banned for one week for a dangerous tackle and is free to play on March 28th. He pleaded guilty
John Leota also picked up a two week ban (for a red card).
Without hope we are nothing, keep the faith, a Tiger for eternity
Iain
Super User
Super User
Posts: 8161
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 6:39 pm
Location: Market Harborough

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by Iain »

Seems reasonable. He could probably consider himself fortunate not to have been sent off.

At least Cole should be back to replace him.
watsonjm
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: Cambridge

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by watsonjm »

Personally thought a yellow card was enough but there we go.
Iain
Super User
Super User
Posts: 8161
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 6:39 pm
Location: Market Harborough

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by Iain »

watsonjm wrote:Personally thought a yellow card was enough but there we go.
It was high and late. One of those borderline ones that tend to be a yellow card and tend to be cited afterwards. We can't really complain.
PAW
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:28 pm
Location: Stoney Stanton

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by PAW »

Ref Saw the incident. Reviewed it extensively with TMO and I think he is included a touch judge in the elongated debate. A considered and discussed decision was "penalty and yellow card".
Why is there any need for a stuffed suit to review it again and add further sanction? I could accept that for a serial offender, but this is just keeping someone in a job.
Iain
Super User
Super User
Posts: 8161
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 6:39 pm
Location: Market Harborough

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by Iain »

PAW wrote:Ref Saw the incident. Reviewed it extensively with TMO and I think he is included a touch judge in the elongated debate. A considered and discussed decision was "penalty and yellow card".
Why is there any need for a stuffed suit to review it again and add further sanction? I could accept that for a serial offender, but this is just keeping someone in a job.
Reasonable point, but ultimately it's a fair decision. This isn't unusual.

Referees seem to be scared of giving out red cards, knowing that a citing commissioner will mop it up after the game. I imagine, despite an otherwise good game, JP and his team will have had their knuckles rapped for not sending Logo off.
tigercaspian
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:56 pm

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by tigercaspian »

Some sympathy for JPD on this one as (and not just because of my 76th minute rant!!) Logo put him in position where he had to give a card of some colour and I really feared it would be a red having seen the slowmo......
Bowden Tiger
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 383
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:12 pm
Location: Little Bowden, South Leicestershire

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by Bowden Tiger »

It was definitely a penalty, as it was late, and then a yellow for the high tackle. I think marginal on the red, that is why it was looked at again, and hence the ban. I am happy with that as it could have been worse and we would have been without him for the rest of the game.
However, when you look at that, and others, how the hell did Marler get away with the forearm/punch?
covrich
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 2:23 pm

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by covrich »

I thought it was a straight red myself.. 1 week ban not ideal but Cole back and it gives Logo a rest
strawclearer
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4109
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:13 am

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by strawclearer »

Iain wrote:
It was high and late. One of those borderline ones that tend to be a yellow card and tend to be cited afterwards. We can't really complain.
Reluctantly have to agree. I'm not saying that smaller people pack less of a punch - Mrs Strawclearer is living proof - but when you're Logo's size, there is a degree of responsibility required.
Happy days clearing straw from the pitch before the Baa-Baas games! KBO
Wear a Mask>Protect The NHS>Save Lives
Jimmy Skitz
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4950
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:19 pm
Location: Thurnby Lodge

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by Jimmy Skitz »

a week off will not do him any harm before taking up the reserve loose head spot on the subs bench
PAW
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:28 pm
Location: Stoney Stanton

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by PAW »

All above are fair points, but from a slightly different angle...

Didn't the Sarries 14 also get binned for a no arm tackle? Whilst he may not quite the size of Logo, is there a degree of inconsistency here? Unless of course he was cited, case reviewed and deemed not worthy of an upgrade.
PAW
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:28 pm
Location: Stoney Stanton

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by PAW »

tigercaspian wrote:Some sympathy for JPD on this one as (and not just because of my 76th minute rant!!) ..
Despite my regular one-eyed rants from the Crumbie, I do have sympathy with the refs. Rugby is a complicated game, where lots of big blokes are doing lots of things at the same time (especially in the scrum)and we now have in-stadium replays and multiple TV angles at full speed and in slo-mo. Then you have the lonely man in the caravan. The ref is constantly moving, dodging large men who could inadvertently injure him and putting up with constant chatter from TJs and the van man

What we can ask for is consistency. Rugby accepts that the ref interprets the laws, he doesn't simply enforce them. Therefore, there will be ref to ref variations. But, if he sets out his priorities before the game, to captains, touch judges and caravan dwellers alike, at least teams have a chance of adapting and being treated equally.

In this instance, JP did seem to be consistent. 2 x armless tackles, both reviewed in stadium = 2 x yellows. It appears the citing commissioner has undermined his decision.

It may only be my opinion but the citing process should only address items of serious foul play which have not been addressed on the field at the time.
sam16111986
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7055
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 6:27 pm
Location: Shepshed

Re: Logo banned for 1 week!

Post by sam16111986 »

I thought JP Doyle reviewed it and came to a logical conclusion. It's a bit late because of momentum, arms are wrapped but there's a high arm to the face. Yellow card as obviously not malicious, given the player was dipping slightly and the obvious height difference.

Not sure this is what the citing commissioner is for. It wasn't dangerous foul play, reckless certainly, and it was dealt with on the field where the officials made an informed decision. All this does is question and undermine the officials decision making abilities.
Post Reply