Should that read 'Incontinence'?

"DISCIPLINARY: Due to illness of the independent judge sitting on the disciplinary panel, tonight's hearings will now be heard on Wednesday."

What constitutes an independent judge? More to the point, who are the non-independent judges? Kouka££ and Flanagan? Barring that last bit, this is a genuine request for info.

Think its mainly former players

media.therfl.co.uk/docs/DISCIPLI ... 20Copy.pdf

media.therfl.co.uk/docs/DISCIPLI ... 20Copy.pdf

Thanks for the link, Glow. If one of the recurring names is NEIL Turley then, without intending to cast any doubt at all over his integrity, I realise that (certainly in the case of Leigh players being hauled before the beak) he couldn't possiblybe viewed as independent. I am still very much in the dark as to the criteria that define the independent judge though. Perhaps Reffy can help?

A panel member (ex player) is independent if he hasn't or hadn't any connection with the club the 'offender' plays for. I doubt Turley would be deliberating on Acton's case, not because he wouldn't do an honest job but to remove any calls of favouritism from opposition fans.

Thanks Reffy. That much understood and agreed with. The problem I have is that the release said THE independent. Presumably that would be the Chair? What qualifies THE independent judge.

The usually jocular Bongser is genuinely enquiring. I think that there would be a lot less controversy were we all suitably enlightened.

I am not sure that is correct. The judges for the week are picked well in advance and they obviously will not know which teams players are going to be cited until a day or 2 before.

Also, somebody like Danny Sculthorpe played at Leeds, Wigan, Warrington, Wakefield, Huddersfield and Castleford. That is half the teams currently in Super League so he would be bound to be judging at least one of his ex teams more often that not.

Tonight's panel includes Stuart Fielden and Danny Sculthorpe both ex Wigan. They are not judging on Wigan players tonight but they ARE helping hand down sentences to 2 Saints players who have a big derby match against Wigan in 2 days time...

I don't think they will be biased but at the same time calling them 'independent' is a stretch with 200+ Wigan appearances between them.

The third member and Chairman of the Tribunal is a Judge.

They can only make it as independent as is practically possible, former players at least have an understanding of the game. We simply have to trust their integrity, and having a 3 man panel should ensure any biased is weeded out.

Full ermine clad Judge fresh from naps in the House of Lords and sporting a wig dodgier than Eddie's?

In name only, without the paraphernalia.

Reffy tells me that the Judge is one in name only but Glow's question does put me in mind of another question on QI back in the day: "Why does the House of Lords smell vaguely of urine?" The answer proffered was that the good people of the upper chamber have a propensity to wear tweed a lot and that the colour in tweed is set using urine. That puts the wee in tweed.

Still unclear, Reffy, on what constitutes the independence of the Judge and Chair. I am not being deliberately obtuse.

The learned judge will only be bothered about procedure and law, he will ensure that the proceedings are done properly, the rugby bits will be the responsibility of the ex-players.

Local solicitor or full on Juris Prude?

A reet proper judge.

4 match ban apparently.

If you insist on getting bans at least keep them small



A 7 match ban followed shortly after by a 4 match ban, idiot!



He clearly has the talent but he needs to prove he can keep his temper.

Wouldn't play him again for the rest of the season (although he will only be back for Leeds + MPG if we're in it!) and then ship him out next year on a half season or full season loan to the best team willing to take him on the understanding that if he behaves himself he might have a future at the club.

He is too talented to give up on just yet IMO but too hot headed to keep giving chance after chance to.

Dewsbury/Sheffield etc. would surely jump at the chance to get a player of Jamie's quality and gives him a final chance to show he is capable of behaving himself.

Such a frustrating player!

Yes, £100 fine and 4 match ban.

What do we do with this guy now

He has only recently apologised publicly for letting the club down with his behaviour at Swinton and a 7 match ban.

He obviously has not learned what representing this great club means. Speaking to him about conduct obviously is no good and will fall on death ears as it has proven again.

He is a liability and a distraction and by the time we come to week 7 he will have been paid to sit out all but 3 of our last 14 matches due to suspension.

Release him now.

He can not handle it at this level, he is probably better having a couple of seasons back in league 1 , where his actions will be less scrutinised in an environment less intense.

11 games suspended this season. I'm sure Derek isn't too happy paying him to sit on his backside. At least his penalties won't cost in the upcoming fixtures.

Don't agree with the length of the ban HOWEVER, I believe it is a blessing that he cannot be picked for 4 matches. We have more controlled players capable of stepping up waiting in the wings.

One less player for the Fev team to wind up

Fev's John Davies also picked up a two match ban. They will miss him.

Really? Well a mere ton of ackers from Ackers ain't gonna pay for His Nibs' hob nobs. Were they to award shorter sentences (I hope to keep this one that way) they could round up and fine the usuals more often and the process might pay for itself!

Seriously, Reffy, thanks for the gen.

He's contracted to 2018.What options do we have available?

I am very surprised at the length of the ban but every cloud...............