Sorry

- but in my defence I do feel really passionate about this injustice and my typing my have got ahead of me a little.

A sensible conclusion my backside, 3 game ban for Bailey a total joke. Bailey did nothing wrong.

Bailey's shove looks unnecessary from the Sky footage but not from the amateur footage on youtube. I bet the Panel only saw one of the views.

3 matches for something the Ref didn't even give the player a telling off for and that no spectator or even media picked up on before the referral to the board seems way out of proportion.

Of course he didnt see it, when has Bailey ever hit anyone whilst they are looking

Got to say that I think the RFL have gotten this wrong. There was nothing malicious in the incident and it was caused by Silverwood's poor positioning. Bailey deserved a warning, possibly a small fine, but not a ban.

I have to say it was worth a ban from what I've seen. Bailey actively pushes out with his hands at the ref. Regardless of the reason, you simply can't do that. Three matches may be a bit OTT, but the RFL is obviously trying to send a strong message to all players.

What happened on friday wasn't as dramatic as this as 00

You appear to have Bailey mixed up with Lee Radford

Um, no he hasn't

No he isn't

Radford would be hitting a player while they arnt looking AND while they are on the floor with no chance to retaliate

I agree that it seems harsh, but it sends the correct message out about conduct towards referees, when in recent times the standards have slipped a little

The maximum penalty of 3 matches is obviously a warning message for future incidents. IMO seems a very OTT reaction. Bailey shouldn't have 'pushed' him (the contact I've seen seems very minimal) and Silverwood shouldn't have been in the way.

The annoyance is how this ban compares to others for high shots etc. Just seems silly. Even more when techniques like DDT's are awarded just as a penalty, reviewed and not punsihed. Logic seems to have been left behind.

Bailey will have to go away, gnash his teeth for a few weeks and crack on.

I was going to post something similar. It may only be a shove and Silverwoods fault, but if he was given a telling off at Red HAll, whats next a Di CAnio situation or GAz Hock from a couple of years ago?

I wonder what would have happened if BAiley tackled and prevented the try? Or just tackled the player at the same time taking Silverwood out at the same tme?

Shoe-in for mass t hysteria thread of the week!

Apart from a few rational exceptions.

The most ted man in super league can't do what he likes then.

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.