Disciplinary

[Charriots Offiah]

Games gone soft if they are classing that French one as dangerous.

It went soft a few seasons ago.

That's a bit disrepectful to the current players don't you think? Ask Scott Taylor if the "game's gone soft" as he's retiring to ensure his body still works enough to play with his kid. The players are stronger and fitter than ever, and the collisions are massive and higher impact than ever before - but because the rules have changed the "games gone soft". The rules changed every year back then (whenever "back then" was), just like they do now and you can guarantee the "game had gone soft" then too.

It is not a dig at the players, they are all tough men and I am sure that they will agree that a lot of the Disciplinary Committee's decisions are woeful. Half of the fines and bans being handed out are totally ridiculous. I am all for protecting players from foul play or thuggery but tackles like Bevan French on Friday and Kaide Ellis the week before should do not fall into those categories. Such decisions change games and livelihoods.

[Mike]

It went soft a few seasons ago.

That's a bit disrepectful to the current players don't you think? Ask Scott Taylor if the "game's gone soft" as he's retiring to ensure his body still works enough to play with his kid. The players are stronger and fitter than ever, and the collisions are massive and higher impact than ever before - but because the rules have changed the "games gone soft". The rules changed every year back then (whenever "back then" was), just like they do now and you can guarantee the "game had gone soft" then too.

It is not a dig at the players, they are all tough men and I am sure that they will agree that a lot of the Disciplinary Committee's decisions are woeful. Half of the fines and bans being handed out are totally ridiculous. I am all for protecting players from foul play or thuggery but tackles like Bevan French on Friday and Kaide Ellis the week before should do not fall into those categories. Such decisions change games and livelihoods.

I agree with that. The regulations are inflexible that they're trying to apply and that leads to very harsh bans and fines on some occasions. However, I'd say this is a reaction to the inconsistencies we saw when the committee had more leeway. Its a fine line to tread and they're not going to please everyone. I think they got it roughtly right this week with no real repercussions for French. The letter of the law says its a dangerous tackle (and the player did have to leave the field), but it was more of a case of a great hit with a slightly out of control ending IMO - so a wrap on the wrists seems to fit the bill.

[Charriots Offiah]

That's a bit disrepectful to the current players don't you think? Ask Scott Taylor if the "game's gone soft" as he's retiring to ensure his body still works enough to play with his kid. The players are stronger and fitter than ever, and the collisions are massive and higher impact than ever before - but because the rules have changed the "games gone soft". The rules changed every year back then (whenever "back then" was), just like they do now and you can guarantee the "game had gone soft" then too.

It is not a dig at the players, they are all tough men and I am sure that they will agree that a lot of the Disciplinary Committee's decisions are woeful. Half of the fines and bans being handed out are totally ridiculous. I am all for protecting players from foul play or thuggery but tackles like Bevan French on Friday and Kaide Ellis the week before should do not fall into those categories. Such decisions change games and livelihoods.

I agree with that. The regulations are inflexible that they're trying to apply and that leads to very harsh bans and fines on some occasions. However, I'd say this is a reaction to the inconsistencies we saw when the committee had more leeway. Its a fine line to tread and they're not going to please everyone. I think they got it roughtly right this week with no real repercussions for French. The letter of the law says its a dangerous tackle (and the player did have to leave the field), but it was more of a case of a great hit with a slightly out of control ending IMO - so a wrap on the wrists seems to fit the bill.

This game is played at a high speed and therefore under the current rules a good tackle, such as Bevan’s, can be judged as illegal which is ridiculous. The DP need to look at mitigating factors rather than just pressing ahead with fines and bans. In Kaide’s situation it was obvious that the attacker was backing into the tackle and giving him nowhere to go. My biggest bug bear is a late tackle, if the video is played at normal speed there are very few that should be judged as illegal but slowed down they look a lot worse.

[Caboosegg]

That's a bit disrepectful to the current players don't you think? Ask Scott Taylor if the "game's gone soft" as he's retiring to ensure his body still works enough to play with his kid. The players are stronger and fitter than ever, and the collisions are massive and higher impact than ever before - but because the rules have changed the "games gone soft". The rules changed every year back then (whenever "back then" was), just like they do now and you can guarantee the "game had gone soft" then too.

It is not a dig at the players, they are all tough men and I am sure that they will agree that a lot of the Disciplinary Committee's decisions are woeful. Half of the fines and bans being handed out are totally ridiculous. I am all for protecting players from foul play or thuggery but tackles like Bevan French on Friday and Kaide Ellis the week before should do not fall into those categories. Such decisions change games and livelihoods.

I agree with that. The regulations are inflexible that they're trying to apply and that leads to very harsh bans and fines on some occasions. However, I'd say this is a reaction to the inconsistencies we saw when the committee had more leeway. Its a fine line to tread and they're not going to please everyone. I think they got it roughtly right this week with no real repercussions for French. The letter of the law says its a dangerous tackle (and the player did have to leave the field), but it was more of a case of a great hit with a slightly out of control ending IMO - so a wrap on the wrists seems to fit the bill.

I don't know getting a £250 fine for doing nothing wrong is a pretty big repercussion it's a fans season ticket on early renewal

Should have an independent investigation into the panels decisions and where the fines are going. They have been fine happy and it stinks of trying to recover the rlf losses.

It's also further hindering our ability to bring in players as clubs will have to factor in the potential of 23 fines into salaries.

[keptinthedarkfans]

It is not a dig at the players, they are all tough men and I am sure that they will agree that a lot of the Disciplinary Committee's decisions are woeful. Half of the fines and bans being handed out are totally ridiculous. I am all for protecting players from foul play or thuggery but tackles like Bevan French on Friday and Kaide Ellis the week before should do not fall into those categories. Such decisions change games and livelihoods.

I agree with that. The regulations are inflexible that they're trying to apply and that leads to very harsh bans and fines on some occasions. However, I'd say this is a reaction to the inconsistencies we saw when the committee had more leeway. Its a fine line to tread and they're not going to please everyone. I think they got it roughtly right this week with no real repercussions for French. The letter of the law says its a dangerous tackle (and the player did have to leave the field), but it was more of a case of a great hit with a slightly out of control ending IMO - so a wrap on the wrists seems to fit the bill.

I don't know getting a £250 fine for doing nothing wrong is a pretty big repercussion it's a fans season ticket on early renewal

Should have an independent investigation into the panels decisions and where the fines are going. They have been fine happy and it stinks of trying to recover the rlf losses.

It's also further hindering our ability to bring in players as clubs will have to factor in the potential of 23 fines into salaries.

I have thought this. There should be some sort of accountability for their wrong decisions . Seems there get out clause is £250. Just to justify the player being called before them. Also are these fines and panel fees logged in the rfl audit imo the panel have to keep these fines rolling in to keep them in a job. Love to see annual audit of the panel.

[moto748]

I fully agree with Mike in his comments about high-speed collisions, and the game not going soft. But on the disciplinary, doesn't it come back to the same old problem? It's a bit like the obstruction rule: fans want to see 'consistency', so OK, we'll have black-and-white rules, if you run behind a team-mate, you'll be penalised, whether or not any defender seriously inconvenienced. So with these tackles: if we attempt to draw a distinction between tackles where the player is tackled around the torso, and those where a leg is deliberately lifted to put an opponent in a dangerous position, and leave that to the judgment of the ref on the field? And video ref, come to that, from next season? Would that be OK? It would for me, but I think many disagree.

[josie andrews]

THREE disciplinary charges overturned after appeal

Leeds Rhinos, Wigan Warriors, Warrington Wolves, Hull FC and Castleford Tigers stars all landed themselves in trouble with the disciplinary.

The match review panel charged 14 players with six players sharing seven bans and half of the players banned were Salford Red Devils stars including King Vuniyayawa and Kallum Watkins.

Today a number of charges were challenged.

Tuesday’s meeting of the independent Operational Rules Tribunal produced the following results.

Jacob Miller of Castleford Tigers was unsuccessful in his appeal against a Grade C charge of a dangerous throw in the Betfred Super League fixture at Warrington Wolves on September 2. Castleford’s challenge of the grading, while not upheld, was not found to be frivolous. The one-match suspension and £500 fine determined by the Match Review Panel remains.

King Vuniyayawa of Salford Red Devils successfully downgraded two charges arising from last Friday’s fixture at Wigan Warriors. Vuniyayawa had been charged with Grade B dangerous contact, and a Grade B high tackle, in two separate incidents, each of which was to have carried a one-match suspension. In each case, the charge was downgraded to Grade A, meaning a £250 fine, but no suspension – so he will be available for Sunday’s fixture at home to Warrington Wolves.

Oliver Partington’s challenge against a Grade A charge of a dangerous throw was also upheld. In this case, Partington challenged the guilty charge, which carried a £250 fine – and was found not guilty, meaning the fine is removed and no addition to his record.

A third Salford player, Kallum Watkins, was unsuccessful in his challenge to a Grade B high tackle charge in the Wigan game. Watkins’ challenge to the grading was rejected, although it was not found to be frivolous – meaning the one-match suspension and £500 fine imposed by the Match Review Panel both stand.

https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/three-di ... eal-81515/

[josie andrews]

What’s with the £500 fines?

They are half filling up the Christmas bonuses at the RFL!!

[Nezza Faz]

What’s with the £500 fines?

They are half filling up the Christmas bonuses at the RFL!!

I read some while ago Josie the fines (now given out instead of suspensions) goes towards the RL Cares Charity, as well as the cost of running the Disciplinary system and Referees, and the Academy game.

[Firestarter]

It really is a joke.Just make the right decision in the first place.Its video evidence ffs.Honestly itd totally ruining the game.Get a grip