Does the momentum rule come into this????

Only in the second stanza...

I'm not the only one then that watches Traffic Cops on a Monday night and shouts abuse at the TV when it tells you what "next to nothing" sentences a lot of the local idiots get for driving, drugs and assault offences then....

Don't know if it's a help or a hindrance, but he is in a job which has plenty of opportunity for community service.

Well if he goes down, maybe he could lend it to Caro to help his tackling?

Oh there are plenty, on TV. It is baffling how loads of (apparently) perfectly good evidence isn't enough for the DPP to prosecute. To be right, I guess the law should show a little mercy sometimes, but there ought to be limits!

Maybe from a legal insider's point of view it is different, I don't know, I assume there are genuine reasons (other than the prisons supposedly being full) why the prosecutions don't come off, but I'm just generally baffled how, for instance, anyone is still LEGALLY driving with around 50 points on their licence. My 'ead 'urts!

So a policeman can walk around with a taser but when it is wrestled off them it becomes an offensive weapon. How does that work? Surely the copper should have to take more care of it? Funny old world.

It's an offensive weapon in the hands of anybody. But an authorised officer can legitimately carry one, and provided he can prove just cause and complying with the relevant rules and regulations, he can use it.

Whereas in the hands of anyone else, it is automatically an offensive weapon full stop, end of, don't pass Go, don't collect £200, go straight to jail. A sidestick is an offensive weapon too. Same reason the police can carry them and we can't.

Not being an expert but surely assault on the police should be a custodial sentence. I really can't believe you'd want this type of person playing for your club if he is found guilty.

Not exactly in a position to be choosy, are we? If he gets a custodial sentence, so be it. Personally I think he'd be very fortunate not to.

I'd let Peter Sutcliffe play for us if he had a good step, electric pace and a kicking game.

Nah he runs with a limp, think he's got a stone in his sock or something

FFS. Might be time to leave this alone.

Yep, pretty inappropriate.

As for Moore, surely the magistrates referring it to crown court says all we need to know about what's likely to happen....

Up just before the Summer bash weekend ....

Not that he'd make a difference to that ridiculously one-sided and unfair "extra" fixture anyway.

Yep, I still cant understand how we are matched up with Hull KR - the RFL cant have chosen a more one-sided affair - good job we're their pets

Always said any summer bash or magic weekend fixtures should go on the league table at the time

1 V 2
3 V 4
And so on, can't believe any fan would not go because they don't know who their team will be playing till the week before

It will never be a fair round of fixtures regardless of how it's structured.
If they want to take RL on the road and showcase the sport then why not just make it a 9s tournament, offer a trophy and prize money to keep teams interested, and see how it goes?

The 9s tournament they hold in the NRL every year is one of my favourite sporting events now, it's awesome.

The issue may be you not knowing which day your team is playing on until the week before which would make hotels, travel, etc difficult.

Good point, hadn't thought of that to be honest.

Maybe have all the games on sane day. First game starts at 7.30 AM, im sure some folk would be just on their way home

And there would be plenty of pubs already open in Blackpool...

Or base it on last year's league table. Champ Shield rematch. Losing semi finalists against each other. Two promoted teams play each other. 9 v 10 play each other. Then 7 v 8 from Middle 8s and 6 v losing MPG team.

Easy and fair. But the RFL don't like it because they prefer the games they think will attract biggest crowd to actual fairness.

I'm sure they actually did it that way, maybe for just one year, back when we were still in SL. We played Wakefield iirc.
No idea why they switched back to 'derby' games. Maybe the crowds weren't as good?

They did for Magic yeah. They also did a thing where the top 4 were in a group, the next 4 were in a group, then the next 4 again, or something like that. You drew someone from your "group".

No doubt it's because the crowds aren't as big for those games as they don't look as attractive as effective derbies or "big games" which Bradford/KR would have been had the Bulls not fallen so far in the last couple of years.

But the point remains that it shows it's all about crowds and money, rather than fairness.