There’ll be no pack left at this rate https://twitter.com/therfl/status/15476 ... EmokY63dng

There’ll be no pack left at this rate https://twitter.com/therfl/status/15476 ... EmokY63dng

https://twitter.com/m_shaw1/status/1547 ... X2r2Iqp49A

https://twitter.com/m_shaw1/status/1547 ... X2r2Iqp49A

Bloody hell you are right we will struggle to put a pack out for the london game what a farce the york game was tough but fair if this continues they will have to ask us fans to turn out.

So that leaves Tangatta, Murray, Calcott, Fairbanks, Garside, Morris, Oakley, Moore, Wood, anyone I’ve missed and any loan / DR to choose from for the pack.

I suppose arundel could play 2nd row and put McComb in the centre, be interesting to see if Morris plays for us again, I suppose mason is a possible, and a slight chance at a Hewitt or ashworth on dr, I think Huddersfield are struggling for numbers as well . I wonder how far off Knowles is?

If they are penalty notices the Workington game should count towards them which is handy.

Listening to grixs’ prematch interview we will be using every tool at our disposal in the coming weeks , garside will be back , duel reg and even dipping into the loan market, it was noticeable he didn’t even mention Morris who it looks like he won’t be here next year .

I have just watched the York game, and fail to see how Fax managed to get 5 guys cited and banned. We’re any York players at the disciplinary ?
Pauli Pauli made the most of having his leg lifted, he nearly head butted the grass with that dive.

That’s what I was going to ask. Surely they have received the bans/notice so the next game should count. We will have to wait for the squad selection but hearing the interview with Simon it sounds they are going to miss the Workington match.

Normally bans don't start until the week after, so unfortunately probably won't start until London.

So the RFL feel that Mata'utia gets a 3 match ban for other contrary behaviour even though he was sent off for lifting an injured player. How does that happen ? One rule for the teams the RFL want to help and one for the rest of us.

Surely the charge and the grading for lifting a injured player should be the same across the board this decision does the disciplinary system no favours at all.

Matty gee , 5 games , absolutely ridiculous.

What ! The RFL disciplinary board make up who gets what. And it seems the two lower leagues always get hit harder than SL teams

Halifax are appealing the gwaze ban , hearing next Tuesday.

I should think so too. It does make it seem stranger still that SG hasn't selected Titus since the match in question though,. I can't understand the thinking behind that.

The only game he was available for was the dewsbury game , the other games he is serving his ban . Regarding the ban itself I think the rfl are going to have to distinguish between two incidents which have the same charge and grade but 5 games difference .

3 of interest on this.
1. We have (as SG said) nothing to lose against a ban of this length.
2. The glaring discrepancy between Titus G and Sione M.
3. Appeals have reduced previous ban lengths but only when SL players are involved.

We’ll see if the RFL are as bent as I think they are.

How does this affect the ban he has been given. Has he already served a match ban by not playing last Sunday? Or can he now start playing until the appeal is heard? If the latter can he play on Sunday and does last Sundays game not count as a band game? Therefore meaning he has missed 2 games for no reason. It does seem late for an appeal. Maybe if the band is reduced the missed games count as ‘time served’. If the appeal is not upheld then nothing lost.

Thing is didn’t the RFL have them down as same offence (contrary behaviour, lifting an injured player) but a different charge TG grade F and SM grade C.
SM had a high tackle 1 game charge from the previous week successfully overturned TG had no previous disciplinary charges against him.
In every respect TG was clearly unfairly discriminated against by the RFL which is completely against the spirit and a blatant contradiction of the “tackle it” campaign.

The Greatest Game, er no, more like the The Greatest Shame RFL.

Yes my mistake, same offence different grade ,and like you say no previous from gwaze , several from matautia.

He’s served two so far , York and Workington.

I would be looking to appeal some of the bans from the york game too larroyers lifting on pauli pauli he for me flips himself into landing in a awkward position and this seems to be creeping into the game more and more and the only way to stop it is to stop penalizing the tacklers and start punishing the players play acting to try and get others in trouble.

Fenton Rogers won’t be playing this week for us as he has been given a 2 match ban

The RFL’s duplicity in all of this is clearly shown in the different grade for the same offence prior to it being sent to the tribunal.
They wilfully and deliberately gave a lower grade against SM precisely to cap and lower the limit on the length of a ban to a maximum of 3 games because it involved not only a SL player but one who played for one of the big wigs in St Helens who they didn’t want to upset.
All this to do with stamping out discrimination when by their actions show they are one of the biggest perpetrators is sad and simple hypocrisy.