Well that's fair enough then. I'm not sure what to make about the Mcguire case, on one hand there seems to be very little actual evidence to back it up and it seems to be a case of one person's word against his and IF he is found guilty on that basis then it opens up a whole can of worms. On the other hand IF it is true what he said and about who it was said about then he needs the book throwing at him. I accept sledging goes on in the game,it always has,but you just don't go past a certain point with it.

The ref heard McGuire last time, but no official heard anything this time. So this stems from Charnley just saying McGuire said something and being put on report.
But there must be more to it than that, or any player could say someone said somthing and get them banned. So i can't see this ban just being because a player claimed he said something.

It's embarrassing for us to try to question the process or the severity of the offence. It's a dark day for our club and one we need to seize before it sullies our strong reputation as an inclusive community club.

Just to add…

Not condoning McGuire at all, he is bang out of order. However, I thought what happened on the pitch stayed on the pitch. There must be lots done and said in every single game whilst trying to wind the opposition up. Is Charnley the biggest snake of them all for snitching not once but twice? Hasn’t he got an axe to grind with Warrington and hasn’t he used this situation to heap trouble on his former club and team?

Also, there were rumours that another Warrington player had given McGuire the full sp on Charnley’s kid. If this is true shouldn’t this other player also be reprimanded for loading the gun?

I also agree that the punishment does seem to outweigh the crime here. Some of the physical stuff is getting away lightly by comparison.

It’s a man’s game currently played by men acting like kids. The game is going down the pan.

What do the minutes say? I’m on holiday and haven’t had the chance to sit down and try to find therm. TIA.

Quite

No minutes as far as I can see.

One of the most disappointing things is that McGuire seems to have lied about the first offence. He was quoted as saying (not verbatim) 'I said something bad but I didn't say THAT'.

Someone mentioned to me that whilst at Currie's testimonial dinner at Burtonwood that he stated that he was unaware that the slur he used was so frowned upon in this country when it isn't in Australia.

So his earlier denial doesn't hold water. Not good.

I think it's embarrassing for the sport, and society in general, that we consider name calling as more of a hanging offence than if you physically injure someone, potentially finishing their career.

There was a huge moan last year that the bans for players were excessive - they’ve rectified this and reduced the sanctions of each grading.
We need to wait for the minutes to be released, but he has now been twice found guilty of using language that has no place in society, never mind from somebody representing our town and our sport on a national stage. I expect a very good explanation as to why his bags haven’t already been packed, the silence from the club on this is deafening.

I would think the club have to follow a legal process here. The player may well wish to appeal, which may delay things if it is something we have to wait for before we are allowed to terminate any contract due to behaviour. (If that is indeed on the cards).

I'm sure there will be various meetings at the club today and a statement will come.

its called due process, they had to go through the disciplinary procedure, to see what happens there, as he may have been denying it again. they can't just click their fingers and say begone, like in most walks of life. its not like in the movies.

If McGuire is or isn't guilty as charged & there is mischief coming from the opposition, i would think the whole episode has put a cloud over our team & its performances on the field. We have a situation where the players have loyalties to McGuire as a current team member & also to past teammates at Leigh ,some they have played alongside since childhood. Hopefully,a line can be drawn under the "incident" quickly & the Wire can concentrate on playing rugby again.

I don't think any Wire fan (or official) would defend him if irrefutable proof came to light that he said what is reported. We all agree it has no place iife, society or the sport.

What doesn't quite sit well with me is that he has been disciplined on, it would appear, subjective, unconfirmed allegations from an opposition player.

If such allegations were made against me, I'd expect to see tangible evidence and if none was forthcoming I'd expect the charges to be dismissed.

So, either the RFL aren't operating with total transparency, or they are desperate to be seen to be doing the right thing even if there is no evidence.

The solution is simple - release the details of the charge, supporting evidence and minutes.

Absolutely - but what we have at the moment is a heap of negative press stories and no response from the club.
If I were Wire I’d be putting out an interim statement.

They will be, as they do every week , it just hasn't been done yet

You can't control negative press, if we put a statement out at the moment, it'll just lead to more negative press, and complaints that it hasn't said anything.

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... uspension/

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... uspension/

This. For all we know he walked into that tribunal and just admitted he'd said it and just doesn't grasp the gravity of his words. Until we see the minutes we won't know how subjective his comments were, whether he meant what he said, or whether he's just a poop house who meant it and freely admitted it (probably because he wants to go home!).

Another antipodean signing that turned out to be a disaster, and we cannot say we weren't warned in this case.

I’m eagerly awaiting the disciplinary report to see what evidence was presented.

The first occasion the insult was heard by both the ref and the opposing player who both presented as very credible witnesses.
JM’s defence was much less credible.

What evidence is there for this second offence?

Unless there is something that comes out in the report. It's Charnley's word against Maguires word.

I thought the minutes were released the morning after, not sure why its taking so long.

There will have to be more to it. Although it's only a civil process, the evidence would have to show a 'more likely than not' outcome to warrant a ban. A scenario of one word against another (both uncorroborated) would not meet that threshold.

they're not that regular, its the rfl we're talking about,

not uncommon for them to take a day or two getting on there