Should we start to “legal up” at these hearings?

Bentley returns v St Helens in Round 16, misses Warrington Wolves Reserves (H), Warrington Wolves (A), Huddersfield Giants (A).

The inconsistency is ridiculous. When I saw it, I thought of the Ben Currie hit on David Fusitu'a. That was far worse and nothing came of it.

Seems we are not getting represented well enough at these hearings if you consider what Big Jims saying.
He does have a point and luck does go with the top teams.
I`m sure there used to be a time when some of our players were treat with just as much leniency that maybe coincided with us being one of the better teams in the past.

It’s up to the club whether they appeal the decisions made by the match review panel. They make the decision prior to any club involvement or appeal process.

Surely nobody in their right mind can look at that incident, consider Bentley's record, see what suspension he has been given and think it is unduly harsh.

No issue with the ban duration, possibly with the consistency though.

Look at his previous.
He's not learning.
So, the bans will have to get longer, until he does.

There's a really good player in there but he'll end up destroying his career if he doesn't cut out the cheap shots.

Agree.
It's a bad one.
With his previous, he could have easily got more.
He probably will next time.

The citation summed it up. Something like "high tackle not intended, but careless contact to the head." I don't think he is a dirty player, but he keeps doing reckless stuff when there is just no need. The Wakey lad was stationery under a high ball and Bentley launched himself through the air. Any miscalculation on his part, or movement on the Wakey players part and it was going to look bad. He really needs to get rid of this silly "playing on the edge" b*ll. He's a very good player without it.

Anyone know if the panel looks at reserves fixture lists when deciding ban lengths? Kind of contributes to the impression of inconsistency if some players can discharge a game while others can't.

Grade F for Holroyd. Minimum 8 match ban I think. I hope this is a lesson he never has to learn again.

I don`t agree with the severity of that.
He`s been attacked and defends himself against what 3 players.
Yes he could have backed away but there`s not many props worth their salt that would do that.
A cowardly hit off the ball or a deliberate high tackle should be seen as much worse.
Have the other players who were involved received the same?
I`m sure I'm in the minority here but I do think it`s harsh.

I agree very harsh, but better In a season like this where we can probably scrape by without him. What you don’t have you don’t miss! Was not underhand, just a thing pass defending himself after a horrendous season for him. I can understand……

Mustapha sent off for the reserves tonight for a dangerous throw apparently. I appreciate he has been hardly used this season but with Holroyd out long term he could be needed. Discipline is a major problem that shows little sign of improving, I hope Smith has some serious words with the squad.

The bloke who punched him in the back of the head got the same. Look, I agree that "back in the day" this is a storm in a teacup. Sending off sufficient might be a more reasonable verdict. But we aren't back in the day. Tolerance of this type of shenanigans has changed. If we want to pretend otherwise our players will be banned from now to the end of time. It needs to stop.

He was backing away and players kept going after him. So it's a question of let them punch him and don't do anything or defend himself. He certainly threw the first punch but it could have ended quite quickly if the opposition weren't acting like a pack of jackals

Agreed. I like aggression but the rules allow for that in it's normal game play

If people want to watch a punch up go and see some boxing or whatever

Smithies 2 swinging arms and contact to the head, once was close to a punch, not even a sin bin.
The inconsistency and incompetence is mind boggling.

10 matches for Tom Holroyd. Returns v Warrington Wolves on August 18th

Ridiculous ban for what happened. 1 actual punch as the aggressor (reacting to a squirrel grip) all others thrown while retreating, defending himself against a pack of attackers. What the actual F is the disciplinary looking at?

If you needed any proof that there is anti Leeds bias at the disciplinary committee, here it is. Nonsense ban. Leeds should employ legal counsel and fight it.

Where has it stated he was responding to a squirrel grip? If so, I would have thought A) Leeds would have used in mitigation B) The offending player would have got an even larger ban.