Quote ="Knaresborough Rhino II"One rule for one [urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=637[/url'" Expect the same eventual outcome (warning letter) and any ban to be appealed using the Mathers' judgement from 2008. The RFL have previous where Senior is concerned though expecting him to have higher standards than other mere mortals. I recall him serving a previous ban because he was a high profile player in a high profile game. www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplin ... hp?id=1448

Quote ="Knaresborough Rhino II"One rule for one [urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=637[/url'" Expect the same eventual outcome (warning letter) and any ban to be appealed using the Mathers' judgement from 2008. The RFL have previous where Senior is concerned though expecting him to have higher standards than other mere mortals. I recall him serving a previous ban because he was a high profile player in a high profile game. www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplin ... hp?id=1448

Quote ="tvoc"Expect the same eventual outcome (warning letter) and any ban to be appealed using the Mathers' judgement from 2008. The RFL have previous where Senior is concerned though expecting him to have higher standards than other mere mortals. I recall him serving a previous ban because he was a high profile player in a high profile game. www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplin ... hp?id=1448'" Quote ="The RFL Disciplinary"the punch was unnecessary'" That this comment is in the report implies that in some circumstances a punch is neccesary Can we also assume the most high profile incidents, those shown on the BBC, will also be met with similar severity

Quote ="tvoc"Expect the same eventual outcome (warning letter) and any ban to be appealed using the Mathers' judgement from 2008. The RFL have previous where Senior is concerned though expecting him to have higher standards than other mere mortals. I recall him serving a previous ban because he was a high profile player in a high profile game. www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplin ... hp?id=1448'" Quote ="The RFL Disciplinary"the punch was unnecessary'" That this comment is in the report implies that in some circumstances a punch is neccesary Can we also assume the most high profile incidents, those shown on the BBC, will also be met with similar severity

That will go in Senior's favour.

it didnt before and it's not true anymore

Meh, it'll be reet. Warning letter and a slap on the wrist.

This makes me laugh... Senior responds to provacation by a Stains player (and gets a match ban):

"The Panel reviewed an incident which occurred in approximately the 77th minute of the Match. In the Panel’s opinion Mr Senior threw a deliberate punch at a St Helens player (Wilkin). In the Panel’s opinion whilst he was reacting to the conduct of the St Helens player, the opponent was not expecting this punch to be thrown, the punch was unnecessary, and there was the potential for injury to the St Helens player. In accordance with the RFL’s On Field Sentencing Guidelines, the Panel consider that such offence is a Grade C offence (Strike – Punching - Violent). "


Cunningham punches a player who hasn't even done anything and fractures his eye socket:

"Player intentionally has a jab at the Wakefield player and as such is guilty of misconduct; however the Panel are giving him the benefit of the doubt that contact with the eye is accidental and as such consider that it is appropriate to deal with this matter by way of a caution."


Going off that, Senior is certain to be banned, surely?

[urlhttp://www.therhinos.co.uk/news/11075.php[/url

I've got a feeling that's not going to go down too well on the Wigan board.

I think that kicking out is less dangerous than a spear tackle
the latter got a more severe punishment so the RFL agree

Agreed.

Is that based on the fact that Delaney didn't get any injury while Tomkins had a nasty cut, needed 8 stiches and was lucky not to be blind in one eye?

STFU you tart!
It was clearly an accident whilst sh#*house coley was up to his usual tricks.

But the side offended against - in this case the Rhinos - does not benefit from the punishment - whereas, arguably, Wigan's opponents this week do,

you can suffer a career ending injury in a legal tackle just as you can escape "unscathed" from the most cynical or dangerous act



a common opinion on our system, did you feel the offence warranted a card in the game? we did of course get a penalty which helped us in the game and the enemy of our enemy is our friend (if wigan falter this week it benefits us)

I think Senior should have got a ban. You are not allowed to kick out in the tackle at all, never mind getting your foot 4 feet off the floor.

Uncle Keef - 9.20 @ Kempton anyone?

Well it's a good job you aint on the RFL Disciplinary Board then int it?

Of course you do. I think you should have your internet access blocked.

That would have been inconsistent with a previous similar incident involving Richard Mathers and Robert Burrow.

A warning letter was deemed sufficient in that case so Senior can consider himself a little unfortunate to have been asked to attend a disciplinary hearing and receiving a subsequent fine.

The punishment was within the guidelines set for the grade of offence.

Surprise surprise.

You continue to show jack all knowledge on anything rugby / otherwise related.

'tard.

He should seek out a career on the catwalk if his legs are that long

I bet you want Delaney banned as well then..his feet were certainly more than 4 feet in the air.

From the gift that is redvee


[i"during one of the replays on TV, you can clearly see him looking through the a gap in the bodies of the 2 tacklers, before aiming his kick"[/i

Oh my god, that poster must have one sad sad life.

KAPOW!