Wellens was so slow getting there they doubled his fine.



Seriously I thought he would have got off with it due to his previous good record.

I wonder if he had entered a guilty plea if he would have got just a fine?

It's done now so we've just got to get on with it, it's not the end of the works and still good enough to get a win.

Anyone else think Wellens waving his arms at the ref later on may have had a bearing on the outcome?

Doubt it as others before have won the appeal but had their fine made bigger instead.

I meant the =#FF0000Early =#FF0000Guilty =#FF0000Plea in the first instance, everyone seems to have had the minimum sentence.

we don't seem to have had a skipper that can talk to the ref decently.Joynty was too quiet for me.Jammer was well loud & now we have Wello acting like a plane.He ought to be on an aircraft carrier waving the planes on & off.Both my wife, son & i cringe when he starts doing anything like that.Maybe he thinks being the captain he should be like that but its ottp in our eyes.He is such a decent player as well.By the way where has he got this new found speed from [no not the drug

Them tackles, Pauls, well both the 3 of us went ouch with Pauls, Laffranchi's was well a tad high but niether one a ban imo.Maybe Mike & K.C.should have a word with him about the problem, its ott for us.Its spoiling a good player.

The only thing consistent about the disciplinary and appeals committee over the years has been their inconsistency.

Its difficult to work out why some are cited and others ignored.

Laffranchi put in an excellent tackle for me putting the player flat on his back. Not dangerous in any respect whether he lifted him or not. There is no common sense applied. Meanwhile , other players seem to be able to get away with hitting people about the lughole week after week. Why wasn't Carvell summoned to appear for instance ?

Anyway, we will have to take the decision and just get on with performing on Friday. Our squad is good enough to win, lets back them all the way.

Absolutely ridiculous decisions both of them. Neither were penalties in the eyes of the referee and the match review committee really stretched to find things to ban Saints players for. Had we been playing Cas this Friday they would not have even been cited, it's a decision based purely on who we're playing this weekend, to make it more interesting.

Wellens has never been banned before and he's banned for that? As ever you just roll your eyes at the stupidity of it all. There will be 3 or 4 more severe incidents in every Super League game over Easter, so are they going to ban upwards of 20 players? Of course not.

Wello has said on twitter he's got concerns about the process that saw him banned. He should air those, get the criticism out in the open and put some heat on the RFL and it's utterly farcical processes and administration.

No, he should get the club to put something in writing to the RFL. "Airing" his criticisms publicly will probably just lead to some kind of fine and accusations of whinging.

I suspect the RFL is starting to clamp down more on spear tackles (apart from when they are committed by Aussies in the WCC of course) because players need to get the message that when in defence they are responsible for what happens in a tackle. "Poor technique" etc doesn't cut as an excuse when the possible outcome is a serious spinal injury.

Personally I think RL is hard enough without shoulder charges to the head and spear tackles.

The RL makes a mockery of itself yet again. Wellens gets a ban for a very minor offence (at best) having never been banned before in over a decade, while serial thugs get away with 10 times worse game after game, week after week, and get only the same punishment as Wellens has whenever they do get cited. Just bloody ridiculous and shameful. I look forward to seeing what randomised bans they manage to try to cripple us with to level the playing field unfairly come the playoffs. Clowns.

He was too tired to talk to the referee with all the silverware he was lifting over his head.

love that

Westwood 2 high shots in the first 40 mins last night, for consistency Im sure we will see the RFL cite him.

Also looked a very similar tackle to the one Laffranchi copped a ban for under the sticks.

Laffranchi's tackle was a spear tackle. There were no spear tackles in the match last night. Even Saints owned up to Laffranchi's tackle as they didn't bother to appeal it.

The Westwood tackle under the sticks was a good hard tackle IMO but something needs doing with his constant high shots.

I'm sure the Wigan player will be banned for his spear tackle.

Won't mean anything though.

If anyone is cited for anything, they'll just cop the early plea for 1 match and miss our big game against North Wales Crusaders.

What the **** does that mean in the greater scheme of things? Wigan get to rest a player for some meaningless league slog against whoever they troll out against next week? Bloody fantastic punishment and righting of a wrong that'll be... They should have been down to 12 men at a critical point in the game when under heavy Saints pressure and defending a shaky looking lead. They should have lost the game instead of being handed it on a plate by a bent **** (coincidentally wearing the same colours as Wigan....)

So should Saints have been TWO players down v Wire last week.
How does that work?

YAWN. Keep fishing.

Oh, come on my one-eyed clueless troll friend, you MUST do better than that... LaFrank's and Wellens' offences were not even [iremotely[/i in the same league and you know it...

Very, very, VERY poor....

The disciplinary looked at them and thought they were.
If McIlorum gets a ban (or doesn't) I'll stand by their decision. They are far more experienced and neutral than you or I would ever be.

Oh all right then - case closed and everything's all right then, eh?

Or not...