Ah my apologies I stand corrected, memory decieves in old age. However, my point still remains that it has never been the case that players should be banned for a similar amount of the time as the victim is put out of the game.

There should be a standard ban for whatever offence is committed, however, if, as JT says, the offence is proved to be premeditated, then the suspension should be supplemented with a percentage (30% for example) of how long the victim is out of the game with a minimum of 1 matches.

Using the above scale;

Victim to miss 8 weeks (8 games), offender to receives standard suspension + 2.4 (rounded up to 3) games on top.

Yes, fit to play this weekend and Cunningham is free to play this weekend. Seems the rfl already take into account the extent of injury and length of lay off!

Correct, they do:

Disciplinary panels shall undertake an assessment of the seriousness of the player’s conduct which constitutes the offending and categorise the offence as being at the lower end, mid range or top end of the scale of seriousness in order to identify the appropriate entry point for consideration of a particular incident(s).

(5.4)

Such assessment of the seriousness of the player’s conduct shall be determined by reference to the following features of offending:

........................

(5.4.4) The effect of the offending player’s actions on the victim (i.e. extent of injury, removal of injured player from game)

a miracle............fit to play this week.

Yes indeed, what a shame. He should have been injured for months shouldn't he? Tut tut, how dissapointing for you.