a little tenuous to argue that he could effect the result. certainly given the team that was named by Milllward that day.

=#FF4000not to be named yet - McFld

Would their ban mean that they would be able to move over here and play, or a ban from whole rugby league? Willie Mason already confirmed to be joining Hull KR.

I think the point is IF the Bulls had been 3 points short of the handicap with 5 minutes to go, Gleeson COULD have accidentally missed a tackle.

Of course that didn't happen, but by actually playing in the game you bring the integrity of the result into question.

indeed, which is why is ban was longer than sean longs.

Just to clarify I wasn't using it to have a dig at the two Saints players. I was just pointing out that the RFL wouldn't be having zero standards if they chose to ignore the bans from the NRL, in light of their previous actions, unless of course people deemed the UK incident as zero standards.

As neither received the 'life-time' bans being mentioned in the context of the NRL players I'd question the comparison you are wishing to make.

Which is exactly what I said.

Both incidents are to do with betting, and against the rules of the game. That's the only comparison I need, as there is a massive difference between missing a couple of months and a life time ban in relation to either.

I fully anticipated the Saints issue being used as a 'bench mark'.However the aspect I comment on is whether the game as a whole-- rfl and nrl,in this case-- considers the judicial results of its counter parts disciplinary process to be of any value and the sport to have public integrity.
If we ignore the NRL result(whatever it may be) then we don't give the appearance of having a governing body with any plan or strategy for oversight of the whole game.
Should their be a message which suggests you can transgress in one league and simply move to another?After all they wouldnt posssibley want to bet over here would they????

IMO and in principal both ruling bodies (NRL and RFL) should back decisions taken by the other wherever possible.

A ban in one hemisphere should be recognised and supported in the other and that cuts both ways. Just as a playing contract in one hemisphere should be recognised in the other, which perhaps hasn't always been the case in the past.

I agree.

We should wait until Billy Slater and Greg Inglis are next in the WCC then ban them for life for something. Anything really.

They're Australian aren't they. That should be enough.

Agree 100% with this.

does anyone know if a players arrived in this country after been game bans in oz? i seem to remember morley ending his roosters career with a ban but am not sure if that was carried onto his warrington career

Les Boyd is a precedent, if you want to go back that far.

A precedent for what exactly?

IIRC (and I may be mistaken) but I thought he'd completed his ARL ban before joining Warrington in the mid-eighties.

That's possible. I may have done the misremembering that he came here *because* he'd been banned in Aus, which would put him in the same situation as the betting-scandal batch (if there is truth in the rumour).

We don't live in that morally ideal world. A pity.

In League Weekly, we have been linked with
Weller Hauraki

and are said to be closing on a prop from the NRL.

(I know he's not NRL but playing in Aus) Knowing our luck we'll be resigning Chris Feather!!

I hope Leeds have been looking at least since they transfer listed Eastwood, but I suspect we're a bit late in the market to get a major signing of any kind. Not to say we couldn't get someone decent enough - Leuluai was no star when he signed - but all the best forwards will likely be signed and sealed by now.

Next week or so is the key. Anything longer and I think it will be too late to get a big signing.