Agree with Jonh. If there is any consistency at RFL Disciplinary, Bailey should get at least a one match ban. As I said on another thread, I find it amazing he wasn't cited to appear before the Disciplinary Committee for the elbow in Riley's head/face in the last play of the Cup Final.

But, of course, he's a Leeds player! The way they show dissent and get away with it time after time is also appalling.

I'm just hoping next Sunday that we don't get sucked into falling for any similar tricks, just concentrate on the game itself and dish out any retribution needed on the scoreboard.

Must admit that I have mixed feelings about playing Leeds, on one hand it's a good match to get ourselves in the right frame of mind needed for the play-offs. But it's gonna be a tough game as even though Leeds are hit by injuries at the end of the day they are champions and the pride of being current champions will ensure they won't go down without a fight.

It's about time the authorities did something about Bailey, it really narks me when he does some cheap shot on an opponent then once trouble erupts he quickly makes himself scarce attempting to look like the innocent party ... trouble is frequently Bailey instigates the trouble. Sadly, Radford fell for it yesterday and ended up getting red carded. Did notice that Bailey stayed well away from Radford when he offered to escort him off field to continue their "disagreement".

Also, it annoys me when Leeds players mouth off to the referee every time a decision goes against them. If the refs had a bit more bottle and marched them back for dissent then maybe the message would get through to their players to keep their traps shut. It's rugby not soccer, we don't want to go down the road of seeing players surrounding a ref every time they disagree with their decision.

Come off it pal,most/all teams have players that want to referee the game and contest refs decissions. Your own team are no angels when it comes to that.

I just think it's yet more dire refereeing. We saw a display of similar ineptitude on Friday night, when Childs turned up clearly intending to be the centre of everything, the result being that he slowed the game right down both for Wigan and Bradford. Neither side were really able to get going, because the referee was constantly blowing up.

Sorry to say it, but these guys really are made in Cummings's own image. He was the ultimate pedant as a referee, seeming to blow for every single thing he could find, no matter how innocuous.

Childs, Bentham and Silverwood are exactly the same. It doesn't seem to have occurred to any of them that you could probably penalise each scrum and play-the-ball in a match if you are going to be so picky - and the really galling thing is that there never seems to be any comeback. The last time I heard about a referee being severely reprimanded was after Robin Whitfield was demoted for sending Ellery Hanley off when he questioned a decision, back in the late 80s.

Cummings is the whole of the problem here, in my opinion. We have got to get that man out of that job, and replace him with someone who has no personal agenda, is a thousand times less arrogant and has at least one grain of common sense.

another decision that had me puzzled was when delaney was given to have knocked on, he then throw the ball into touch, a good distance from where he was stood. at leeds in the cup coley knocked on and kicked the ball away, free kick to leeds. whats the difference?
mcclennan came out with a good comment that radford deserved to go a you cannot throw punches for nothing, it's not that peacock never throws the first punch , is it !! the pressure must be getting to mcclennan as he seems to excuse every foul play from leeds as the opponents fault

Brilliant!

Another one where you're slightly off. Ian Smith had a look at his touch judge who was stood by the coner post to indicate he was unsure of whether is should be a try or not. But dont let that get in the way of your anti-leeds agenda.

Sinfield is the rl version of John Terry.

Radford throws some punches in retaliation, off, Wellans does the same, nothing,

not only did he tell the ref to look at the TV he actually made contact with the official to let his point be known , is that not an offence in itself ?
leeds have beed getting away with bending the rules for a few years now , they are forever winning penalties by kidding the ref and the likes of sinfield and Senior are forever in the refs ear .

lets just hope that Wigan can stroll past them on Sunday , come on The Warriors !!!!!!!!!!!!

So you're listening to (albeit alternate) Sky commentators. Did anyone actually see the Touch Judge standing at the corner flag or not?

Are people really suggesting that what Bailey did deserved to be punished by a penalty let alone a sending-off or possible suspension?

Difference is Wellens punches would not have burst a wet paper bag



Thought Redford deserved a Red TBH but Bailey should have gone to the bin for 10 lets see what the disciplinary have to say about it both could get called before them think Radford will get a fine and no ban (as he served nearly a 1 match ban at the game) and Bailey will get a fine if they are both sent for.

Penalty, definitely - he was the first offender with repeated elbows to Radford's head. One alone could have been excused as him trying to get up, but there were at least 4 hits.

Radford retaliated, and both should have been yellow carded.

A bit of biff always adds spice to the game if you ask me, Radford at most should have been sent to the bin along with Bailey and then when they both came back on it would have been great to watch them go at each other.

Taken from George Riley's twitter. Certainly made me laugh.

Awful refereeing.

Bailey should have got 10 for use of the elbow, Radford 10 for retaliating.

Penalty to Hull.

The elbows were out of order, but its done the job of getting a man sent off (probably rightly, although I'd have been happy with a yellow).

Did keith mason get a ban for stepping on fielden's ankle the other week? I class the two incedents similary. Disguised foul play that's not enought to injure, but enought to hurt and rile up the victim into blowing his lid.

Also, how lame did Bailey look, waiting until half a dozen players were holding Radford to decide he fancied having a go back, then trying to head butt sean long!? He may as well been saying "hold me back lads, hold me back".

Personally, I thought it should have been penalty to Hull with both players put in the Sin Bin.

I'd class Radford's actions as retaliation to Bailey commiting the first offence by using the eblow.

Sitaution would have been dealt with by not going OTT.

If we had two refs, a la the NRL, would one have been Johnny on the spot at the play of the ball and interpereted the situation differently, acknowledging the elbows?

Ian Smith is only 10 yards away and looking directly at the play the ball and there are also two touch judges. I think there's enough people in good enough positions to interperate the situation.

Agreed, but just because they [ishould[/i, doesn't mean they [ican[/i or [ido[/i.

Let's hope they review situations like this.

I'd love for Cummings to have a open, weekly summary within the media.

if you were at the game you might actually see why he went to the video ref , the lino had his flag up you fool.god is every team envious of us on every board thers something about leeds.

Will never happen, he seems to have found himself accountable to nobody - as standards get worse game by game.