You've lost me now Keith, are you speaking of yourself again?

SOME OF THE ONE EYED COMMENTS ON HERE SUPPORTING BAILEY ARE HILARIOUS



HE PUSHED A REFEREE. THERES ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE FOR HIS ACTIONS



RESPECT FOR THE OFFICALS IS PARAMOUNT, YOU CANT GO SHOVING THEM

My take on the whole situation is this:



He pushed a ref and got banned.

Fair enough, except on Warrington. If the offence warrants 3 games then silverwood should have sent him off there and then (although I guess, given his track record, that he may have actually missed it). Had he done so, Wire might well have won.

www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... Bailey-ban Fair enough

www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... Bailey-ban Fair enough

[urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3407[/url

Incident considered Deliberate physical contact with a match official in 36th minute


Decision On Charge
Player plea Guilty
Summary of CM's submissions on the Charge / evidence The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 36th minute of the Match. In the Panel’s opinion you made deliberate physical contact with the referee. The Panel believed that this behaviour was serious misconduct, unnecessary and against the spirit of the game. In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade C offence (Deliberate physical contact with a match official). If found to have committed the offence, again in accordance with the On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the normal suspension range for such offence is from 2 match suspension to a 3 match suspension. In addition the Tribunal has the power to impose such fine as it considers reasonable.

Summary of Player's submissions on the Charge / evidence Player admitts guilt.
Decision Guilty plea.
Reasons for Decision

Decision On Sanction (where found to have committed Misconduct)
Summary of CM's submissions on the appropriate sanction No further submissions.
Summary of Player's submissions on the appropriate sanction =#0000FFMr McDermott believes Mr Bailey is guilty of the offence. Mr McDermott does feel that the match official’s postioning was poor, however Mr Bailey should have realised that the match official was not a decoy runner. In addition he should have taken a more appropriate course of action in attempting to move around him.

Aggravating Factors
Mitigating Factors Guilty plea.
Reasons for Decision =#0000FFThe panel believe that Mr Bailey should have dealt with the situation in a different way. There was a deliberate push on the referee and continued petulance showed towards the referee after the try was scored. The panel will not tolerate any aggression showed towards a match official. The panel have taken into account the plea of guilt but cannot overlook the seriousness of this incident. It is therefore the opinion of the committee that a 3 match suspension and a £300 fine is in order.
Suspension 3 matches
Fine £300
Warning

The important message from the RFL is not aimed at superleague at all but further down the leagues and to all of the match officials who do the job unpaid and often unthanked, its good that they are seen to be backing up a referee.

Agreed.

With all that said you might have thought a 2 match ban for a guilty plea would have been more forthcoming.
Then again the RFL have tried many times to get Bailey banned and failed.

I have no problem with him being banned for the contact on the ref, but it needs to be in proportion to other incidents from this season, and three games is way OTT.

Is it really worth a longer ban than for what Tommy Lee received for almost decapitating Lee Briers?

So Mr Bailey should have spoke in polite manner and asked Mr Silverwood "Would you mind getting out of the way sir, as I believe you are preventing me getting to a attacking player to tackle him"

I personally can't see the difference between what Webb did and what Bailey did.

I'm not sure this is comparable to most other incidents though. Were this a ban for a foul of some sort then it should be proportionate to other instances of foul play. However, this is a different thing entirely. I'd like to think that its the beginning of a new tougher stance on disrespect to the official, where I think standards have slipped in recent seasons. A few more penalties for backchat. Maybe a trip to red hall for anything a bit worse would send the correct message out

Wot a joke the rhinos club and Brian McDermott are for backing the decision of the RFL disciplinary panel on this matter and supporting bans on there players. So much for RFL having rhinos in they're pockets. Ridiculous, load of bollox, wot a stuff-up, no common sense, pathetic, shocking, laughable, farce, incompetent, inept, bizarre, crazy, indecent, silly, dubious, unacceptable, RFL apologists, ref apologists, clowns, typical anti-leeds bias by leeds, hope rhinos and mcdermott gets a game at Headingley soon while it's fresh in everyone's memory, bailey should knock McDermott on his ar5e for not backing him up, and don't get in the way of the RFL whatever you do cos they do what they want, rhinos club make RFU old farts look like mensa candidates, surely wilkin & peacocks shiny new union could of, would of and should of done something useful asking serious questions of club as to why they agreed with RFL about been treated more harshly for shoving a referee than they do for attacking a load of red herring 'ouch! my head' examples? Is referee's "safety" more paramount than any other red herrings on offer? I have no problem with him being banned for the contact on the ref, but it needs to be in proportion to other red herrings from this season, and three games is way OTT.

Well said... ETC.

Could someone please paraphrase as I really can't be ar[size=100s[/sizeed reading all this.

Nobber...etc

There is far worse cases of disrespect to an an official though. We only heard last season James Graham on the telly shouting obsenities to the official, which was caught on camera and the ref spoke to him. But did he get banned?

There is a difference between disrespect to officials over decisions made (ala Graham above, Hock push), and what Bailey did in trying to do his job.

I'm not defending him, far from it, but I think his offence needs differentiating from showing lack of respect to official. If what he did, as has been shown now, is an offence then we all play by same rules now. But my own personal opinion is that the way some react to certain decisions is far worse an offence, if the term to be used is disrespect.

There is still no reason why Silverwood should also not be publicly rebuked here for his very poor positioning in this incident. Are other refs making this mistake?

I agree. I believe the extracts from the hearing say that the ref was poorly positioned.

I think on the disrespect issue the hands part could be seen as a bit of a slippery slope. Best to have a well defined line. Hands on the ref is a big no no. Now we just have to be consistent with the ruling

Interesting summary. Why was Bailey charged with a Grade C offence?

Have the sentencing guidelines changed [url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/On%20Field%20Compliance%20Sentencing%20Guidelines%202010%20-%20Final.pdf[uSINCE 2010?[/u[/url

[uOn Field Compliance Sentencing Guidelines from 2010[/u
15.1(i) Behaves in any way contrary to the true spirit of the game - Grade D-E ... Deliberate physical contact with a match official.
Grade D offences carry 3 to 5 match bans.
Grade E offences carry 4 to 8 match bans.

From case notes:

"The panel believe that Mr Bailey should have dealt with the situation in a different way."

It would be useful if they'd gone into detail here, just to know what is acceptable. To safe-guard this offence occuring again. Bit wishy-washy.

On viewing there doesn't look much between Webbs and Baileys 'shove' but one was a 3 game offence and the other was a naughty letter sent to Mr Webb Senior.

NOT SHOVING THE OFFICIAL WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE

Quote ="Keith Swiftcorn"Interesting summary. Why was Bailey charged with a Grade C offence? Have the sentencing guidelines changed [url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/On%20Field%20Compliance%20Sentencing%20Guidelines%202010%20-%20Final.pdf[uSINCE 2010?[/u[/url [uOn Field Compliance Sentencing Guidelines from 2010[/u 15.1(i) Behaves in any way contrary to the true spirit of the game - Grade D-E ... Deliberate physical contact with a match official. Grade D offences carry 3 to 5 match bans. Grade E offences carry 4 to 8 match bans.'" Try looking at the 2012 criteria... www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/ ... 0Final.pdf Deliberate contact with a match official is now Grade B-E, so a ban of 1-2 games would have been the recommendation had he been charged with a Grade B. It would appear the RFL have treated Webb's contact with the official and Bailey's as being entirely different in nature, hence Webb has been found guilty but not banned due to "entirely exceptional circumstances".

Quote ="Keith Swiftcorn"Interesting summary. Why was Bailey charged with a Grade C offence? Have the sentencing guidelines changed [url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/On%20Field%20Compliance%20Sentencing%20Guidelines%202010%20-%20Final.pdf[uSINCE 2010?[/u[/url [uOn Field Compliance Sentencing Guidelines from 2010[/u 15.1(i) Behaves in any way contrary to the true spirit of the game - Grade D-E ... Deliberate physical contact with a match official. Grade D offences carry 3 to 5 match bans. Grade E offences carry 4 to 8 match bans.'" Try looking at the 2012 criteria... www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/ ... 0Final.pdf Deliberate contact with a match official is now Grade B-E, so a ban of 1-2 games would have been the recommendation had he been charged with a Grade B. It would appear the RFL have treated Webb's contact with the official and Bailey's as being entirely different in nature, hence Webb has been found guilty but not banned due to "entirely exceptional circumstances".

They say, 'different'

I say, 'give me detail'

Quote ="Andy Gilder"Try looking at the 2012 criteria... www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/ ... 0Final.pdf '" I wasn't aware of the updated guidelines, hence why I asked the question in the first place. Thanks for enlightening me. Quote ="Andy Gilder"Deliberate contact with a match official is now Grade B-E, so a ban of 1-2 games would have been the recommendation had he been charged with a Grade B.'" Which begs the question... what factors determined being charged with a Grade C offence instead of a Grade B? I'm guessing it was the accompanying petulant behaviour towards the referee after the initial shove?

Quote ="Andy Gilder"Try looking at the 2012 criteria... www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/ ... 0Final.pdf '" I wasn't aware of the updated guidelines, hence why I asked the question in the first place. Thanks for enlightening me. Quote ="Andy Gilder"Deliberate contact with a match official is now Grade B-E, so a ban of 1-2 games would have been the recommendation had he been charged with a Grade B.'" Which begs the question... what factors determined being charged with a Grade C offence instead of a Grade B? I'm guessing it was the accompanying petulant behaviour towards the referee after the initial shove?

Yeah, some people are just downright rude aren't they?

Believe it or not there are some who are so rude or lazy that they can't be ars*d to use upper and lower case on their keyboards.

The result is they shout all the time and their posts look completely juvenile and inane.

AND I AM BOTH