But isn't the use of the VR restricted to specific items not just what the Ref asks for, an example being their inability to rule on forward passes.

Right or wrong we could see RFL having no choice but to give it sending off sufficient or even rescinded because the letter of the law hasn't been followed.
There will be no one but the referee to blame for that

And this post puts the incident to one side, not commenting on that!

Would appear he's got a two match ban and fine

Source?

its up on the Bulls site now

A harsh punishment IMO. Does Raynor have a poor disciplinary record?

I was wondering the same thing, checked the Sky stats and they've got him with 6 yellows since 2003. Guess that wouldn't show if he'd been cited though.

The ban is laughable. Should have been sending off sufficient. If he'd stayed on the field I could have understood a ban.

And tigs, the point I was merely trying to make was I'd never seen such an occurrence before. Can it be done? And can he scrutinise it at such lengths? It's slightly different to scoring a try.

So it looks like once again, we have broken new ground, as we always like to at the Bulls. First team to have a player sent off on the say so of a VR. Well as always, I will look forward to this new innovation being introduced into every game. It's going to slow the game down a lot though, with the VR being called in to rule on every high tackle. Or is it only going to be on every high tackle where a player is, or pretends to be, knocked out? What are the new guidelines? It will be interesting to find out.

2 games is more than I expected, but it could have been worse. If it had been a ball & all tackle & the tackler's arm bounced off the ball into the face of the carrier & knocked him out cold there would have been no argument about the red card or subsequent ban. As it was Raynor was nowhere near the ball. The suggestion the VR got Raynor sent off is cheap & laughable. But don't let that stop your fear of persecution.

To be honest, I am pretty sure I have seen games on Sky where the ref takes advice in his ear from the video ref before showing his card. I suspect without the video ref there the incident would have ended up on report since the contact at full speed didn't look worthy of a red card.

It's a funny old league we play in. The joke concept that is the Magic weekend that interferes with the fairness of a regular season where each team faces each other twice in the league. Then some games refereed under different different circumstances. Sooner or later the RFL need to either follow the NRL and video ref EVERY SL match or scrap the whole concept until they can afford to have every side playing under the same conditions.

Yes.........but they always look like that!

Don't be daft!

How could they find new and novel ways to disadvantage Bradford if they properly levelled the playing field?

Give us Richard Silverwood every other ga... oh... hang on.

So at full speed, live, you thought red card? You were in a very small minority then. The BBC commentators missed it, the crowd missed it. It took lots of replays for most to spot it. So to say the replays had no influence on the outcome is ridiculous.

No, at full speed I completely missed it. But Ganson saw it &, IIRC, asked the VR if there was clear contact with the head (I am sure someone has the tape & can say exactly what he said). I have nowhere said the VR had no inlfuence. I have repeatedly said Ganson would have sent him off if there was no VR & as it was there why not use it.

He asked if there was contact with the head. Meaning he was not sure. So without the VR he would have been on report.
I am not disputing the use of the technology at all, but it's never used for that is it? Not until now anyway.

I've definitely heard the referee check with the video ref if an offence is worthy of a red card before Sun.

You said I was mad when I first joined to suggest the referees were out to get us

Yes and one of those games was at Castleford and the referee in question was Steve Ganson asking video referee David Campbell "if it was serious" to Ganson said "ok so it's serious" cue the red card and Castleford down to twelve men.

It's an utter disgrace. Okay he was fouled but it was not malicious purely instictive. It was a penalty full stop. Problem is that Ratboy was knocked out and according to Statler & Waldorf on Sky, he is the greatest player in the game bar none. That fact alone meant GR was doomed from the start. The video refs should not be allowed to watch the replay in slow motion, it distorts the reality. Eddie and Stevo are now influencing the referees.

Hardly suprising.... Day they know what day it was?

VR was used when Andy Coley was sent off at Catalans last year apparently. Seems it has happened before i have been very reliably informed. The tackle was reckless, thats enough to warrant the punbishment under the rules, end of. Incidently, Sam got a ban earlier in the season when he was 3rd or 4th man into a bit of biff, so he gets targetted by the refs too.

Instinctive is when someone changes direction & a player shoots his arm out & invariably catches the other player high. No way was Raynor's tackle instinctive, whether he was aiming for the head or arm is a different matter. The next time Ryan Bailey swings his arm across an opposing players chest to dislodge or clamp the ball, misses completely & knocks the player unconscious I am sure you will all support his defence it was an accident, he shouldn't be sent off or banned.

Now we have established Ganson, the RFL & Al Qaeda had not hatched another secret plan & trialled it on the Bulls you will all be eating humble pie & apologising?