You can relax for the next 3 games Duckie, and there is no need to stress yourself out, until the play-off game, where barring any injury during training Vaughan will be our starting prop once again.

The best thing for us.
Wouldn’t want him getting 3 games vs London.

The Bunker (the NRL ref ) do intervene, probably more than in Super League. But it's far more professional (not hard admittedly) and smoothly done.

At least Musgrove isn’t at risk of getting a ban…

Well it may also be that he stayed down because he had just had a big shoulder to his head, which I’m sure you can appreciate would be quite an impact - the disciplinary seem to think so

Also, not read all of this thread but seen no mention of Thewlis, who “stayed down” a couple of times and it could be argued should have been green carded

Looks like we are going to appeal the Vaughan ban. Not sure that's a great idea, really. They will probably deem it frivolous and give him an extra game.

Stupid idea. When it comes to contesting bans we’re really a bit thick with which ones to pick.

Even if they leave it as it is I can’t see it being deemed frivilous.

Second guessing the RFL disciplinary is folly. Best case we get him back for London at home, worst case we lose him for first play off game. Just isn’t worth the risk at all. Last season was a free hit to get him back for potential play off games and we didn’t bother trying. Nonsensical.

Club are appealing the Vaughan ban. My guess downgrade to a C and a 2 match ban.

Btw last time a frivolous charge was added I’m pretty sure it was a player from our squad.

Is a frivolous appeal rule actually in the RFL`s rules?

I only remember it starting to be used by Cullen and cohorts several years ago.

Could be something that they have made-up that doesn`t exist in the actual rules?

It’s still there but it’s not Cullen or the people on the MRP it’s a different panel that deal with appeals.

They'll slap us down hard, you watch. Did the same last time.

It depends how you approach the appeal. Your case can be unsuccessful and even weak without it being deemed frivolous. You basically have to be appealing either guilt or grading and have a case to back it up. You can't appeal on the basis of "this ban is too harsh" or "it didn't deserve the higher end of the grade" or anything like that, which I think is what some of the clubs that kept getting hit with frivolous appeals were doing.

Basically if you go in saying it should be grade C rather than D, you may or may not be successful but as long as you have a reason for arguing such, it shouldn't be deemed frivolous.

I see we've got chief spotlight-hogger Chris Kendall in charge against Saints, by the way. I wonder which lucky soul will be on the receiving end of his "there is nerrrr mitigation" catchphrase this week?

Usually has the other hogger Thaler as VR. Oh well 4 yellow cards and 5 bans till middle of next season.

Appeal failed stays at 3 games.

Should’ve cried like Shommeh and got a miraculous reduction.

So Makinson had his reduced from 3 to 2 are we saying Vaughan’s was worse when given Makinson jumped up when he made contact with the player. Was not bothered about him missing these 3 games but the failed appeal as really annoyed me given in my opinion the Makinson contact was worse. And I did say at the time Makinson got 3 for it I thought was harsh.

They gave it Makinson so he could have his home send off.

Oh my what was I thinking of course they did, but it’s not like he won’t play there again is it.

This is why the disciplinary procedures are screwed up https://www.rugby-league.com/match-review-panel

This is why the disciplinary procedures are screwed up https://www.rugby-league.com/match-review-panel

Paul Cullen. You are a discrace to the sport. You are a absolute bell (finish it off ) you have destroyed this once great sport and you have made rhe sport a laughing stock around the world.
You are one of the reasons why this sport is in the state it is in and whether sport is in decline.
Fire him immediately and let them play.
We put a mural on the wall of the kings head. This man is supposed to be revered by the wire faithful. But is being ridiculed and rightly absolutely lambasted for the shocking way that he and his team are running the disciplinary panel.
He has single handedly destroyed his legacy with the actions he is taking in running this disciplinary.

What bothers me about the process is only 1 person watches each game and then decides what goes to the panel. So if you think about all the times people moan about other incidents that are missed then for me there’s your answer.

I can’t see how having 1 person only deciding what goes up in front of the panel and the panel making a decision on level of penalty is acceptable. We can see who the 6 people are we just don’t know which game they watch. For me 3 people should look at each game.

Then if and when a player decides to appeal we have KC and 3 side panel members, sorry could not stop laughing when I saw Adrian Morley’s name on there. But a KC is not cheap no wonder the RFL is potless when paying these people are we scared to police it ourselves.

Next all these rules that we have now and how many that are saying about the difference between here and the NRL it’s simple, our sport is being sued to death by players that played back in the day now looking for a payoff on something we did not know much about as we do now. No ignorance not an excuse but it was what is back then and now the RFL are making all these rules because they just can’t afford more lawsuits.