When it rains these days it really pours.

Even when that rain is actually someone pi22ing down your back and only telling you it's raining.

Truely unbelievable............nah infact scrap that because it's totally believable from that shower of sh*te at the RFL. It was a perfectly good tackle with the Leeds player being slammed on his back.

I just hope the team are storing all these farcical decisions up in the memory bank so that they can use that frustration when it's really needed in the play offs at the end of the season. Ever since John Kear had a right dig after Easter Monday we've been battered from pillar to post by the officials but we'll just have to get on with it.

So Cas will benefit here and Leeds dont even though the incident occured whilst playing against Leeds. Not having a pop at Coley but what does constitute a bad throw? Mounis got sent off and a one match ban. Coley didnt get sent off but got a one match ban and the week before Tomkins got away with it!!

The RFL implemented the sin-binning against Farrell as it was a directive but what about dangerous throws?? There was a video ref there on Saturday for a second opinion and lets face it the decision today was made after looking at a replay of the incident!

RFL - you astound me!

What about Sykes's dangerous throw for which he got subsequently banned, the ref didn't even give a pen for it.

Exactly

You must be a WUM!!! Just how did Wigan benefit from Peacock taking Sams head off as he was on his way to the line?

you musn't have read bentham's rule book. forward pass means you can knock somebody's head off and it doesnt count!

Another good one is kicking out in anger, and subsequently splitting someone's face open. Wigan lost their best forward for nearly 20 minutes. That worked out very nicely for Leeds, who've basically received no punishment at all.

Andy didn't deserve a ban - but it may be for the better as he will have a week off and it will be interesting to see how the other props step up as he has been by far the best performer this season.

Coley, Westwood & Sykes have all been banned although they didn't injure their opponent. Senior who did injure his opponent does not get a ban.
It should be the other way round, surely?

Not really. The punishment is for the 'crime' (or even the intention to commit it) rather than the [ieffects[/i of the crime. That's why a huge swipe aimed at the head will be penalised as a high tackle even if the other player ducked under it and no contact was made.

I do think Senior should have got a one game ban as well though, since I think his action (to kick out dangerously) was intentional, even if he didn't intend directly to hurt anyone.

Mathers & Tomkins did not get a ban for kicking out.

So if a player is injured during a perfectly legal tackle do they get banned?

You still here? Shouldn't you be on the Wakey board about now?

It wasn't a legal tackle, he was charged with an offence, found guilty and fined. What bothers me is that he wasn't banned given his guilt and the damage to an opponent by an illegal action.

To be honest the Coley ban was always touch and go but the thing that es me off is the inconsistancy. All people want is a fair competition! so banning Coley but not Senior is wrong. Even if Senior kicked him accidentally it doesnt make it ok does it? If you run somebody over accidentally do they just let you off even though its your fault? Do they fook. Nobody would be complaining if the bans were consistent and fair.

Heard Coley is appealing against the decision tonight . Seeing as though he has received the maximum penalty he probably thinks he has nothing to loose by trying to get it reduced.

Ban overturned and player cleared on appeal. Any news on yours?

coley has lost his appeal against the 1 match ban

Is being sent to the Siberian Salt Mines for thirty years hard labour as we speak.

Apparently Hetherington was speaking to the RL about the 4 players selected for England, the inference being that they would play London that day with 4 missing, but if Senior was banned as well they would call the game off which would screw London as they have marketed this match as a double header with Skolars. Surprise, surprise, no ban.

If thats true its just wrong on so many levels. Sums up the tin pot RFL.

Correct. The RFL is rotten from the inside out.

According to Radio London it is true.

I take it that is just gossip? If there was written proof of it then it could become very sticky for the RFL.