LeagueNews.co | Jess Malloy
Hull FC coach John Cartwright defended Cade Cust's red-card tackle in the derby loss to Hull KR, insisting there was no malicious intent.
The incident occurred in the 16th minute when Cust collided with Arthur Mourgue while trying to chase a kick to the line.
Cartwright, who admitted he didn't have a good view of the incident, said, "There was no malicious intent." Despite Cust's dismissal, the Black and Whites fought back after Rovers took a 16-4 half-time lead.
Cartwright believed it was a case of a player chasing a kick hard and unable to avoid the collision with Mourgue.
He acknowledged the severity of touching the head but emphasized that the collision was unintentional.
The red card for Cust shifted the momentum in favor of Hull KR, who capitalized on their numerical advantage to build a lead in the first half.
However, Hull FC responded strongly in the second half, showing resilience despite being a man down.
The incident sparked controversy and debate, with many questioning Cust's actions and the impact it had on the game.
Cartwright's comments highlighted the fine line in rugby league between aggressive play and dangerous tackles, particularly when it comes to contact with the head.
While acknowledging the seriousness of the situation, Cartwright maintained that Cust's actions were not intentional.
The incident served as a turning point in the match, impacting the outcome and the performance of both teams.
Overall, Cartwright's stance on the red-card tackle reflected the complexities of the situation and the nuances of rugby league.
Despite the controversy surrounding Cust's actions, Cartwright stood by his player and emphasized that there was no malicious intent.
The incident will likely prompt further discussion on player safety and the enforcement of rules regarding dangerous tackles in the sport.