www.superleague.co.uk/article/le ... ited/24816?

www.superleague.co.uk/article/le ... ited/24816?

Does this mean that Hargreaves gets off his automatic ban?

He should contact tvoc. He'll get him off with the old 100% committed ploy.

Should get 5 games imo awful tackle.

It will be interesting to see as it was certainly worse looking than Bailey's 'Assault' on Silverwood for which he was 'rested' for 3 games

Grade C offence is 2-3 matches. Pathetic, I know.

Singo gets a match ban after his 'early guilty plea' for an offence in the Valvoline cup at Saints.

Good start to your prop forrad career lad.

Does this mean Hargreaves was incorrectly sent off?? From the highlights it looked as if Hargreaves tipped JP but there was the other man in the tackle, L'Estrange.

Or are they both being punished??

Early guilty plea - 2 match ban www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3532

Early guilty plea - 2 match ban www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3532

Two games for a career, even possibly crippling, tackle and three games for pulling a ref out the way to make a tackle

Equals Pathetic

Absolute joke and once again RL looks like it's run by clowns.

The RFL are more concerned with consoling -house refs ego, than the safety of the players who play the game.

I have some sympathy with Lestrange.

He lifted Peacock and a combination of that and momentum caused him to turn past the horizontal. Hargreaves then joined the tackle and drove him into the ground.

I still think more blame lay with Hargreaves for the severity of the risk as without his involvement it would have probably been a penalty but certainly no more. Having said that I don't think there was any intent on his part either.

I can see why the RFL have banned Lestrange as he was the one who lifted him into the awkward postion in the first place, however their was clearly no intent, the reaction of the players showed they didn't think he'd done a great deal wrong and he showed instant concern to Peacock when he knew what had happened.

Compare this to Scruton on Cunningham a few years ago when he singlehandedly picked him up (a feat in itself) and drove him head first into the ground and only received 3 games and you could argue 2 is harsh.

There is obviously a need to punish someone as the risk to Peacock was huge however I think both players were partially to blame and there was no malice or intent from either party

2 Match Ban

[urlhttp://www.superleaguefans.com/bradford-bulls/2012/04/11/lestrange-banned-for-two-matches.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook[/url

What an absolute farce. It's worrying that in the eyes of the RFL pushing an official is more dangerous than potentially crippling somebody.

This "early plea" rubbish is good, but surely this warranted at least a hearing such was the potential for a significant injury, RFL looking like a joke organisation again, sommat needs sortin and quick.

Considering bailey's ban this is a joke surely, intentional or not it requires more that a phone call saying hands up I got it wrong, but I have been a good boy previous bla bla bla blad di da

Clearly depends on who you are and what your reputation is like had it been TMFMISL he would have copped at least 6 games.
The early plea is a joke, if you admit to it early and youv'e been a good boy doesn't alter the fact a players career could have ended.

Stuart Dickens of Fev said in League Express that a it's very hard for a semi pro player not to take the "early plea" because you get a reduced suspension and no fine, yet if you fight the charge and lose you get a longer ban and a fine.

I'm struggling to think of any British based player who has had his career ended by foul play since I started following the sport back in 1982. There may be one or two, but I genuinley can't think of them.

I don't like spear tackles but they are not a problem in the game as far as I can see that needs darconian punishments handed out. I also can't think of any repeat offenders that blight the game. As I remember (and I stand to be corrected) they "appeared" on a regular basis back in the 80's in Australia as a way of taking out playmakers etc. and there was considerable concern for a while until the league got it's act together and cracked down on them.

It's all about prevention.

The risk element to a spear tackle, driven head first into the ground is obvious what the outcome could be.

So let's hope no careers are ended with this needless act.

I think the issue here in the comparisons being made is more that Bailey should never have got 3 games rather than how lenient they have been on Lestrange.
Bailey maybe 1 match at most.
Lestrange 3 games for an early plea and previous good record.

Agreed Chapy.
Let's face it, Ryan Bailey attracts as much, if not more, hate from "other" fans as Gareth Hock of Wigan.
His mere presence on the pitch is enough to warrant instant dismissal and a one game ban in the eyes of many who do not appreciate his subtle skills,particularly in handling match officials.

Then so far it's working without rediculous bans.

I don't believe there is a single professional player who thinks they are acceptable tackles or who would like to spear someone if they could get away with it, but you could have 24 month bans and prision sentences and you won't stop every case of a hot headed BDL getting carried away every now and again.

So the "Bailey" ban is now the gold standard for disciplinary rulings is it?