Is this a daft idea?.

[bill.inger]

As a consequence of the attack by Ablett on Sam and Gansons "on report" decision, I`ve thought about a modification to the On Report system. If Ablett gets one or more match ban, he`s deemed guilty of the offence, therefore he ought to have been sent off, that much we understand but the ban is served against another team. Now he was guilty AT THE TIME of the offence, so why not, the next time these two teams meet,should the offender not be ordered to leave the field after the same time interval as the offence, thus depriving the team of a player for the rest of the game. I think this will be difficult to monitor but it would force referees to be more decisive and flirt a player off instead of leaving the decision to a panel, and if "sending off sufficient", well, thats where we are now, without the On report.

[wiggydoran]

i can see your thinking behind this but it would never work.

The time gap is the first point - Wigan last played leeds 3 months again. it is not fair to hold this ban over his head for this long.

What happens if ablett moves teams before abblett plays wigan again. Should the player be banned againest wigan when he plays for a new team or should another Leeds player be banned when wigan next play leeds?

[the yicker]

Both Ablet and Bailey will both get banned on tuesday which means they will miss the match against the muppets,do you want them banned are do you want them to play against the muppets in the challenge cup next week,what is best.

[jaws1]

If a player is put on report then the ref thinks that the player has something to answer for so PUT HIM IN THE BIN FOR 10 MINS that way the opposition team at least has some benefit.

[gpartin]

If a player is put on report then the ref thinks that the player has something to answer for so PUT HIM IN THE BIN FOR 10 MINS that way the opposition team at least has some benefit.

totally agree, I really don't get this rubbish that 'the sinbin isn't meant to be used for foul play'. If its not then it should be in situations where there's doubt over whether a red card would be appropriate.

[GeoffN]

If a player is put on report then the ref thinks that the player has something to answer for so PUT HIM IN THE BIN FOR 10 MINS that way the opposition team at least has some benefit.

totally agree, I really don't get this rubbish that 'the sinbin isn't meant to be used for foul play'. If its not then it should be in situations where there's doubt over whether a red card would be appropriate.

I agree. Much as I dislike wendyball, I much prefer the way they use yellow & red cards. Reds for the really serious fouls (like Ablett's), yellows for less serious ones, and 2 yellows = red.

[butt monkey]

i can see your thinking behind this but it would never work.

The time gap is the first point - Wigan last played leeds 3 months again. it is not fair to hold this ban over his head for this long.

What happens if ablett moves teams before abblett plays wigan again. Should the player be banned againest wigan when he plays for a new team or should another Leeds player be banned when wigan next play leeds?

Good points. What if Leeds also decide not to play him the next time we meet? Would the reserve game then count towards his possible ban?

[pieeater]

I agree with jaws1 they should at least have 10 mins in sin bin - I think any incident that warrants going on report should have mandatory 10 mins in bin else no benefit to injured party

[exile in Tiger country]

I thought you couln't get binned for head high tackles? It's either a straight red (which that should have been) or on report isn;t it?

[GeoffN]

I thought you couln't get binned for head high tackles? It's either a straight red (which that should have been) or on report isn;t it?

That's correct, and it's a rule that needs changing, IMO.