I merely mentioned him in response to your enthusiasm that Joel Tomkins will be eligible to play against Leeds. I could have named any Leeds player in that capacity. My initial point was that Joel Tomkins is a weak link currently, and his playing against Leeds could well be to Leeds' advantage rather than Wigans.

Though in regards to Bailey, my understanding is that he is recovering from surgery required to heal injuries suffered on the Rugby pitch.

radford gets a lighter punishment for his good disciplinary record eeerrrrrmmmmm............. did they forget this at the end of last season www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/se ... d-play-off

radford gets a lighter punishment for his good disciplinary record eeerrrrrmmmmm............. did they forget this at the end of last season www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/se ... d-play-off

Bet it's a bugger delivering all his fan mail.

GUFFAW.

As ever the RFL Disciplinary is a joke.

Sam got charged with grade B offence and gets a one match ban for "running in and punching during a brawl".

The RFL guidelines ([url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/On%20Field%20Compliance%20Sentencing%20Guidelines%202010%20-%20Final.pdflink[/url) clearly state that running in and punching is a grade C-D charge and a grade E-F if the opposing player was off guard.

Apparently the bigger, dumber Tomkins has decided to appeal against his two game ban.

Strange one that to be fair, I thought a two game ban was about right, one game for each. Could risk adding another game to it for being stupid enough to appeal.

Did he get one game for each or two for one offence and nothing for the other?

Details aren't up yet on the RFL site.

As opposed to hiding behind his laptop/pc

Postman Pat owned again. OUCH

I can remember the reaction from the pies when Ablett appealed last year.

joel found guilty on both charges 2 match ban for the elbow and £300 split over both offences, how can you be found guilty and of a grade b offence and basically get £150 fine the rfl are consistant at being inconsistant

What elbow?

I'm reliably informed that 99% of his fan mail is from you.

Not even Francis Cummins got that amount of obsessive attention from his No.1 fan

How do you know?

Opening mail again looking for HMV vouchers? Tut-tut

Let's roll with your figure, putting me to one side - that still leave hundreds of letters a week for you to cart around. Crack on.

The one he was sent off for leading with and the one he was subsquently found guilty of leading with, I assume.

Really? He got charged with a 'Grade B' offence for leading with the elbow?

Reality check needed.

A reaction time of only 4 mins from our resident obsessive



As his No.1 fan, if you're especially nice to him in his time of need, he might send you a spare pair of his soiled undies in the post. I'll even do you a favour if the postage turns out to be underpaid by allowing it through revenue protection without any surcharges added

You're right. He was charged with the forearm, not the elbow. He was reported to have been dismissed for the elbow. Unable to verify that as the dismsial report is not available anywhere so I will accept on faith that the media have accurately reported that he was dismissed by ganson for leading wit hthe elbow, unless and until some evidence to the contrary can be shown.

That could be possible but upon review by the panel "reduced" to leading with the forearm which is how it appears to me on the video I've seen.

If he's your chief prosecution witness I'm surprised the case ever got to court.

As I said on the other thread yesterday, based on the actual incident from the single camera angle offered (and without the benefit of footage from any of the build up - ie the previous skirmish) it appeared to me a classic over-reaction from Ganson to send Tomkins off.

What Tomkins had used and the initially area of impact (although fairly clear on the footage) I imagine would have been difficult to determine with certainty by the match officials and ordinarily I would therefore have expected the whole incident to have been placed on report.

Ganson may have just decided it was time to take a stand. Difficult to say if that played any part in the send off decision without access to more footage but I'll put it out there as a possibility to temper the over-reaction comment.

Ganson seemed to decide on a red card after further discussion & agreement with the touch judge nearest to the incident.
Tvoc, I cannot understand why you apparently continue to defend Tomkins when his case has been heard twice by (presumably ) different, independent panels with access to more footage than any of us on here have seen who have both determined that he deliberately raised his forearm (I agree with you here that it was not his elbow) into the face of Yeaman.

I defend Tomkins on here only from the charge that he used an elbow in the incident and that when viewed in isolation it wasn't what I would consider worthy of instant dismissal when compared to several similar incidents you may witness over the course of the season. Thankfully the outcome of the game was not adversely affected by the dismissal.

Thanks, I think.

I won't measure your reaction time as you are probably in the middle of sorting your piles. Gotta love monotony.