Ridiculous decision

Merchant Bankers

This is a disgrace. The RFL is a joke. RL will forever stay a back water sport that'll never grow beyond the handful of toothless goons that watch it down here or the miserable northerns who watch it up there if the game continues to be run the way it is.

Just out of curiosity anyone remember when wellsi was "DDTed" and knocked out cold and the ref blew for us knocking on...

I would have walked the team off the field during that first half and only gone back out on the field when someone decided to play league and not whatever it was that rookie bum, who should never be allowed to officiate again, but no doubt will (against us) was calling.

The RFL certainly doesn't do its credibility any favours with a lottery style disciplinary system which seems to be loaded in favour of certain clubs. But then a truly open, consistent and transparent system would see the RFL lose a lot of discretionary power.

What a joke the RFL are, we are one of the cleanest teams in the league but they hit us hard whenever the opportunity presents itself.

How many times has Peacock deliberately laid into an opponent this year with fists flying......but no action taken.

How many times have you seen a bit of biff start and players running in from both sides......but no action of note taken.

Cunningham (RFL love child) deliberately punches an opponent in the face.....but is deemed an accident (RFL have to make sure he is available for Saints end of season run-in).......no action taken.

Whereas with Quins

Catalan v Quins.......biff starts late in the game, 3 Quins players banned (think it was 2-3 weeks) for running in, but only Mogg banned for Catalan. Further Quins player also banned from same game for poor tackle.

Howell lashes out (idiot) at Wigan....no real connect.....in fact Howell comes off worst. Result, Howell banned for 3 weeks, Wigan players running in (see above), no action taken.

Clubb tackles latest Saints hero.......gets banned for 2 weeks....tackle is clumsy on pint sized dwarf, but RFL deem it deliberate (see above re Peacock and Cunningham deliberate acts)

Do you see a pattern forming here??????

Did Clubbs poor tackle really warrant a 2 match ban? A penalty was given and the guy was not hurt, a 1 match ban would have been more than sufficient. It was a `nothing` incident. RFL must be feeling pretty pleased with themselves this morning.

What a pile of c**p.

Has Clubb ever had a warning letter about his tackling technique? I thought it was RFL practice to always warn a player about this before banning them



Sorry, but we seem to get hammered by the diciplinary guys at every opportunity and I think that the club should make some sort of representation once the season is over, asking for clarity in certain cases. I know that the back office is stretched, but I am sure if we all trawl through the rulings for the last 2 years we will find enough evidence of bias against us.
Like 26 times Saints players up, with fattysat on the loo on 5 and cunningham on 5.
Quins have had 13 visits to the naughty chair with howell top scoring on 4..
So Saints are well ahead of us in visits.....but we are hammering them on matches missed

The whole thing's an absolute joke. The inconsistency as bad as that chump we had officiating on Saturday. It seems this happens every season where we slump midseason due to injuries and trumped up disciplinery issues and then cannot recover in time to grab a spot in the play-offs.

Let's all hope the boys can rise to the adversity and get us back in the 8, preferably starting at Bradford this weekend. Shame Clubb isn't playing really as he would eat their backline... literally.

Sorry......miscount.
Fatty Sat on the Loo has been up 6 times so far this year.
1. High Tackle = No case
2. Chickenwing = 1 game
3. Leads with Knee into tackle/Jumps in = Letter
4. High Tackle = No case
5. Slaps an opponent = Man to man, no case
6 Leads with Arm into Tackle = Formal Caution

So 6 incidents, including 2 which are dangerous play going into a tackle which could injure the tackler, a slap around the face (lucky no eye contact there), two high tackles and a chickenwing (topical).....and he gets 1 game.
Clubby on the other hand is up on 2 charges (first time in 12 months) and gets 2 games and a letter



What really gets my back up is that Clubbs young and has a pretty good record, but gets slamed, whilst fattysatontheloo is a seasoned pro who has twice gone into would be tacklers with either his knee or forearm raised this season alone and he gets letters


Over 2 years:
3 visits to the diciplinary for Clubb ends in 1 match, 2 matches and a letter.
10 visits for the Saints player gets 1 letter, 1 game and a caution. In these 10 visits, he has also been pulled up for running in and striking a player.......mmmm...where have I heard that before? Oh yes, LMS got hammered for that while FSOTL got........nothing

Well at least we won't be playing Clubb as much now anyway.
He won't be , Howell and Gafa will be.
He wont be SR, Robinson and Williamson are back.
He'll be on the bench as cover.
So lucky for us it happened now, and not couple weeks ago.

Thought you'd like to know that your favourite ref/chump has a busy weekend reffing at the willows and then running the line at the Jungle.

Problem is that the RFL Disciplinary board are clearly made up of old farts...who are desperately trying to cling onto the slightest bit of power they have. I'm sure they're the same people that get wined and dined at all the major finals....bet they drive "Jaaaags"



The RFL don't do themselves any favours...but what can you do? Until this generation of wasters move onwards (or pass on!) then rugby league is always going to be second or third best to those sports that are run well.

Be interesting to see if this is brought up in Boots n All this week....can just imagine Stevo's response....sure he'll want nothing to do with it!!

How can a tackle and attempt to ground a short player be deemed worse than Cunningham's effort (once tackled) to strike the player on top of him in the face causing an "ACTUAL" injury....not this "possible" injury that Clubb could have cause??!!! This is Rugby....not Tennis!! RFL Disciplinary Feckers!

As much as I want to believe there is no bias, it is getting harder and harder to believe it with the evidence presented.

MATE......I have trawled through a few "verdicts" and we always get the top end. Seriously, if Clubb is supposed to have tried to hurt the lad, then throw the book at him, but if it was unintentional, the warn him. Just a shame we didn't make the CC semis.......he would have only got 1 week then


The diciplinary system needs a total overhaul. I honestly can't see what the panel isn't made up of referees TBH. Surely, of all the people connected with the game, they are best qualified to pass judgement than:
J Spencer R Bridge D Campbell who were the panel last night. There is no background info on these faceless idiots and they would seem to be a Gin quaffing, Jag driving, Golf Club membered group of old farts!

There are at least two very qualified ex officials on that panel mate.

ex officials......that's the point.
The game has moved forward, is faster and the players are fitter than they were....even compared to 5 years ago and as such, different to what the panel were used to in their day.
Also, regardless of their past experience, the decision on Clubb when compared to the Cunningham one point to there being something rotten....and it ain't in Denmark either!
I also believe that Clubby got the ban because the guy he tackled is half his size. As Big Mac said, he got the timing wrong, nothing more nothing less. It's not Clubby's fault the little runt makes Rob Burrow look tall.

That was my first thought. With all our first choice centres & second rows available it doesn't hit us too hard in terms of the team we'll have out for the two Bradford games, but we must have copped more match suspensions than any other SL team over the past two seawsons, yet we seem to concede fewer penalties than anyone else during the matches. It doesn't add up.

Yes I think the statistics speak for themselves (even after giving a child a whistle last week) we do offend less and are punished more harshly with the red and the suspensions.

Club Penalties/Yellow Cards/Red Cards

1 Leeds 180/3/0
2 Catalans 176/1/0
3 Huddersfield 176/2/0
4 Celtic Crusaders 160/2/0
5 Salford 160/3/0
6 Castleford 156/2/0
7 Bradford 154/1/0
8 Wakefield 151/1/0
9 Wigan 143/4/0
10 Warrington 135/1/0
11 St Helens 130/0/0
12 Hull Kingston Rovers 128/1/0
13 Harlequins 126/0/1
14 Hull 106/1/0

As soon as Clubby was up for the disciplinary, I think we all knew that this would happen. Why do the same clubs get pinged and the same ones get away with murder.

Not Russ Bridge who played for Fulham RL in the eighties I hope!

Hopefully Mac will use this injustice to fire up the Lads on Sunday.

So who polices the police? Why do officials make good Judges? Are all magistrates ex policemen? No of course not they are respected members of the community who are deemed to see things from an impartial viewpoint.

Injustice? So you think it's OK to slam a young kid's head with considerable force into the ground do you? Head trauma is serious, and the potential for serious injury in a tackle which involves force to the head is great. In fact one of Saints' youngsters Jonny Lomax suffered a serious head injury at 14 as a result of playing rugby. It left him unconcious, vomiting and he had to undergo hours of open skull surgery to relieve the pressure building up on his brain, and he had to take a year out from playing rugby. It's a credit to Jonny that he's still playing, and that he's up there as one of the most promising young talents in the game today, but it just goes to show how serious a collision can be if it involves the head.

Shame you had nowt to say about a certain hooker punching someone so had they broke his eye socket...

Legless!!!

you miss the point! nobody here is saying that if an offence occurs, especially a head shot, then it should be dealt with
Read the threads! its about parity across the board with punishment of offences when they go up to the panel
Cunningham blatently punches a bloke in the face! its ON TV and was replayed several times
Deemed to be accidental by the board

1 rule for 1 team 1 rule for another
There are players out there that are known as nasty players and for some reason they get away with it

Again not defending any player who targets the head
But lets have a level field from the discip board if the offence was that bad why did he stay on the field?

What is this hang up people have with Cunningham at present? Are you all bored with Pryce or something? Sheesh. The green eyed monster does indeed exist!

It wasn't deemed to be accidental. Read the ruling. It was deemed to be reckless, but the RFL gave Cunningham [ibenefit of the doubt[/i when it came to hitting the eye socket (WHICH WAS NOT FRACTURED - STOSIC PLAYED LAST WEEKEND). In other words, the RFL simply opted to believe that Cunningham did not [iintend[/i to hit Stosic's eye socket. That was the only way in which the RFL let Cunningham off. Without intent, there was no ban. However, because he now has a formal caution, if he misbehaves again while the caution is live, he will get a ban.

I'm sure that would make all you executioners very happy.