DISCIPLINARY

[josie andrews]

Just shows how incompetent the match review panel are!

[jackthelad]

Just shows how incompetent the match review panel are!

I think you are being kind there Josie, they are complete muppets, some even call them clowns, I tend to agree with all the views posted, they are not fit for purpose

[Mass]

My view would be any player who gets a yellow card should not face any further action as referee and VR have seen it and decided on punishment.

Only red cards and incidents put on report should be viewed by panel.

[moto748]

My view would be any player who gets a yellow card should not face any further action as referee and VR have seen it and decided on punishment.

Only red cards and incidents put on report should be viewed by panel.

I agree. They seem to have this awful system in rugby union now where they give the VR half an hour, or something daft, to decide whether to turn a yellow into a red, and they often do! I'd hate to see something like that come into our game.

[Mike]

Is some of the inconsistency were complaining about what we actually wanted to happen? I.e. at the start of the season everyone agrees the bans are too long and there are too many being handed out. I believe the RFL announced that they would be reducing the severity of punishments after something like week 6 - I can't remember exactly when or what was said, but I do think there was a statement that the balance would be changing in response to criticism. Now we have lesser bans and people are complaining about lack of consistency. I'm not sure if we're comparing punishments before or after the reset TBH so maybe we're not doing this.

[nathan_rugby]

My view would be any player who gets a yellow card should not face any further action as referee and VR have seen it and decided on punishment.

Only red cards and incidents put on report should be viewed by panel.

Is that not true for red cards?

[Blackpool_Pie]

My view would be any player who gets a yellow card should not face any further action as referee and VR have seen it and decided on punishment.

Only red cards and incidents put on report should be viewed by panel.

I agree. They seem to have this awful system in rugby union now where they give the VR half an hour, or something daft, to decide whether to turn a yellow into a red, and they often do! I'd hate to see something like that come into our game.

10 minutes while the player is off the field in the sin bin. Works fine and stops the video officials having to make snap decisions. Doesn't happen all that often either. Fit for purpose one might say

[Mass]

Reason I thought red cards should be reviewed and potentially get a further sanction is that it is a more serious offence and the red card is the maximum punishment the referee can give on the day.

By giving a yellow card the referee and VR have determined it is not worth a red.

[Ipinwigan]

Reason I thought red cards should be reviewed and potentially get a further sanction is that it is a more serious offence and the red card is the maximum punishment the referee can give on the day.

By giving a yellow card the referee and VR have determined it is not worth a red.

The trouble with this system, of allowing the video ref to review an incident, is that it is still open to exploitation by the players, staying down to get a review.
The review system needs to be abandoned and just use it for try decisions, but I would rather not have it at all, just let the ref make the decisions and put up with errors, they happen even with the video ref.

[lucky 13]

Needs sorting it's just so inconsistent.
I know it's a while ago but for me Peter Hiku *assault* in the semi was a an example of deliberate aggressive contact to the head on a player in a vulnerable position. Everyone in RL expected a ban even HKR fans but nothing. Then you get one like AK getting a game and Cooper's head on head getting a fine. I'm ok with the latter being punished but not when obvious stuff is missed or deemed ok.
The one by Passi on Dupree, where they say it was head on head same game wasn't. I have re watched it again and it's definitely shoulder and with force it's a worse offence because while tip tackles are dangerous they are not in these cases as they was controlled. For example how was either tip tackle as dangerous as the Harry Smith one at Cas first game. I don't think in the main most impacts are deliberate it's often poor technique with mitigation on occasions, which is unlike Hiku's and so should be judged that way.
I also think the injury incurred to player effected should be taken into account or how likely it's effects could be. Cannon ball, spear tackles and so on to be judged because of the injury they can cause. Others just down to luck with high impact sports. I can't see how some incidents are not up before the board and then some are it's crazy stuff.
Just like all players don't make good coaches I think many don't make good administrative picks.
Things need changing it's a lottery at the moment