www.loverugbyleague.com/news_143 ... um=twitter Ban certainly if Grade D. Anyone see it?

www.loverugbyleague.com/news_143 ... um=twitter Ban certainly if Grade D. Anyone see it?

just what we need. and no I didn't see it and hadn't realised he had been put on report. he played well!

You don't have to be put on report. They look at tape and then pick out the naughty boys.

We'll miss him as he has been one of the better players so far. It is however, one of the few positions we have a little bit of depth in with Cunningham and Bishay, who I think is a better 9 than 7.

3 - 5 matches! What the h*** did he do? Its not as if we have a lot of experience on the park as it is.

He took a shot at Griffin's lower leg when he was standing upright in the tackle. This tackle has some kind of name that escapes me - cannon ball or summat? Anyway, it was pretty clearly deliberate and I would expect a ban.

Like someone else says, Cunningham and Bishay could rotate at AHB - except that we don't yet have Drinkwater at 7.

Another loanee for a month perhaps?Whose available?

I guess we'll have to move Bishay to Hooker to cover Cunningham for a spell and play James Woodburn Hall to half back. Is JWH not ready for it yet?

RFL citing: www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4956 I believe that that tackle is one that they've said they'll come down on hard this season. So, if he's judged guilty, he's in trouble.

RFL citing: www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4956 I believe that that tackle is one that they've said they'll come down on hard this season. So, if he's judged guilty, he's in trouble.

Did I miss Hock's citing?

He was cited (i thought) before he was sin-binned?

All sin binnings are looked at and referred to the disciplinary committee if it is felt further punishment is required

[url=http://www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/news/12196/9184421/super-league-salford-prop-darrell-griffin-set-to-be-out-of-action-for-two-monthsGriffin out for 2 months.[/url

I wasn't there so didn't see it but if it was intentional he fully deserves a lengthy ban.

Quote ="BroncOnIon"RFL citing: www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4956 I believe that that tackle is one that they've said they'll come down on hard this season. So, if he's judged guilty, he's in trouble.'" Thanks BroncOnIon! As long as it wasn't as cowardice as Olivier Elima's tackle on Heremaia; www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29 ... engthy-ban

Quote ="BroncOnIon"RFL citing: www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?4956 I believe that that tackle is one that they've said they'll come down on hard this season. So, if he's judged guilty, he's in trouble.'" Thanks BroncOnIon! As long as it wasn't as cowardice as Olivier Elima's tackle on Heremaia; www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29 ... engthy-ban

RFL have just tweeted that Scott Moore has been found not guilty of dangerous contact

Great news! We can't afford to have our key players not playing.

So not guilty ...think very unfair we now have an injured player for 2 mths..

Rugby is not the sport for you if this is your attitude. This board has seem some stupid posts (several recently) but that takes it to new levels

Loving YES

The RFL ould have looked at the incident a few times and made the decision that there was no intent involved. Never nice that a players is hurt and I wish him a speedy recovery.

I suspect that certain sections of Bradford's fans think that the RFL made this decision purely based on the fact that London Play Bradford this weekend and the RFL wanted to further kick their tenants whilst they were down

GET IN.

Lol. It is a bit puzzling though, considering that any direct or even indirect severe excessive contact on the supporting leg is deemed as highest ban grade d as stated in that RFL link right.

Though we should not be looking a gift horse in the mouth aye.

Wishing a speedy recovery to the lad.

Well some good news at last, i think he has played well and would have been a loss, sorry for the salford lad. did Hock get anything - like life?