2022 Rugby League World Cup Final(s)

[MillionMilesAway]

Yes, it should have been a penalty try for me but Saints were the better team overall and may well have held on. Yes they have strength in depth in the pack including LMS. Had Walmart been fit it would be just a case of by how many and it might still be with Percival back and Welsby on top of his fame.

Leeds have their first choice wingers out (Hanley and Fusitua), Seizer out at half back and Gannon (both to head injuries / concussion protocol). Harry Newman out at cebtre is arguably the biggest loss but he was injured before the crunch play off games.

I think it will Briscoe and Hardaker or Tindall on the wings. Martin’s is back and can fill in at second row / loose forward. I’m not sure how Seizer will be covered. Maybe it will be by Myker with, Hardajer at fullback and Tindall on the wing.

You know more than me about Leeds - I've found it difficult to follow this season for some reason. That's a pretty bad list for Leeds.

Random autocorrect on Walmsley!

 

[ZebraVicar]

I work with a Swinton fan and he was explaining the confusing format where certain teams get a 2nd chance due to league position.

Doncaster now have a 2nd chance after losing to Swinton, so could play them again in the final !

Yeah I got that one wrong. Thanks for the correction.

 

[ZebraVicar]

Rochdale need to beat Doncaster to play Swinton.

My mistake. Didn't know about the second chance.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

Mysterious second appeal clears Morgan Knowles to play in the final lol. Hopefully, this fires up the Rhinos.

There needs to be an independent investigation into the RFL.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Mysterious second appeal clears Morgan Knowles to play in the final lol. Hopefully, this fires up the Rhinos.

There needs to be an independent investigation into the RFL.

That all sounds very odd - appealling against an appeals decision? The minutes tomorrow should be interesting, but I expect it'll be brief to the point of irrelevance.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

That all sounds very odd - appealling against an appeals decision? The minutes tomorrow should be interesting, but I expect it'll be brief to the point of irrelevance.

I’ve been saying for weeks that IMG will need to advise the RFL to overhaul the disciplinary procedure. This is one of many actions required to bring fans back to the game.

Saints are a brilliant team but they don’t need this for the 4 in a row. A Saints win will grab headlines for a weekend but it won’t bring any new fans to the game - if not earns on merit.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I’ve been saying for weeks that IMG will need to advise the RFL to overhaul the disciplinary procedure. This is one of many actions required to bring fans back to the game.

Saints are a brilliant team but they don’t need this for the 4 in a row. A Saints win will grab headlines for a weekend but it won’t bring any new fans to the game - if not earns on merit.

I don't pay a lot of attention to what goes on in the disciplinary panel as much of it relates to things not in highlights programmes.
Not sure I trust IMG to do anything that isn't related to moneymaking. Could you explain what their input to rugby league is going to be?

 

[CivvyScum]

We had a sports scientist with us for the second appeal. He pointed out that when the injured player got up he drank from that arm and passed left soon after suggesting no injury. As salford scored from that set it fell into sin bin sufficient category. They also took footage from an incident involving Harry Smith from round 10 doing the same with no punishment.
The appeal has been won based upon the fact that we could disprove the original charge. Because it was deemed as a movement which caused 'unacceptable risk of injury' as soon as we could show that there was no risk of injury due to the arm not being moved out of a normal range of motion then there couldn't be any sentencing brought against Knowles. This was supported by medical evidence.
The disciplinary brought an inaccurate charge initially as it was factually incorrect. As the tribunal can only downgrade a charge, not retrospectively change it, the sentence had to be thrown out. Knowles could have been banned, if he'd been charged with the right thing. The tribunal had no choice but to throw it out.

 

[Stephen230]

Not really got much interest left in who wins it now but it’s always a good watch. Especially with there been no football on of any interest on Saturday.

I fear it might be one game too many for Leeds, so I reckon Saints -6 @ Evens might be the bet. I hope it’s competitive though. But if Leeds give up as much field position in the first half as they have the last two weeks, it could be all over by half time.

My prediction is Saints 32 Leeds 14.

 

[Salford in the City]

We had a sports scientist with us for the second appeal. He pointed out that when the injured player got up he drank from that arm and passed left soon after suggesting no injury. As salford scored from that set it fell into sin bin sufficient category. They also took footage from an incident involving Harry Smith from round 10 doing the same with no punishment.
The appeal has been won based upon the fact that we could disprove the original charge. Because it was deemed as a movement which caused 'unacceptable risk of injury' as soon as we could show that there was no risk of injury due to the arm not being moved out of a normal range of motion then there couldn't be any sentencing brought against Knowles. This was supported by medical evidence.
The disciplinary brought an inaccurate charge initially as it was factually incorrect. As the tribunal can only downgrade a charge, not retrospectively change it, the sentence had to be thrown out. Knowles could have been banned, if he'd been charged with the right thing. The tribunal had no choice but to throw it out.