It's late but look at this image:

=#FF0000No screen grabs from Sky footage please.

First contact is shoulder so I'm not sure how such a large ban can be justified.

Agreed.

The disciplinary panel needs to be more CONSISTENT (I'm sick to death of that word, we hear it every week because seemingly nobody in the game knows what it means). If Chase's elbow/forearm putting a semi-pro player out of work for a few months is a 3 game ban, then McIlorum deserves 1 at most.

Yes it has, but who's fault is that?

Ridiculous.

Ganson must be guest of honour in st Helen's tonight I just hope he doesn't pass any old ladies on his drive home.

People seem to be ignoring the the fact it was at the upper end of the scale because he's got previous this season.

Had Wilkin done that to Tomkins some of the people questioning the punishment would be donning black caps.

Not wrong

Comical reactions from the ancient and loyal.

3 games for that challenge is an absolute farce. Please people, dont try and justify the disciplinary actions by approving of that punishment.

Absolute joke

I know what you are saying Andy, but he threw one punch.

If everyone had had thrown a punch this year received a ban then fair enough. If those people had also received a red for a a high shot and then been given 3 matches, again fair enough.

Trouble is they have not.

Punches a go go in the wakey match last weekend and zero action. Perry smacking Lima across the Melon and no charge, Challenge cup final punch thrown, again no charge.

Its the inconsistencies that gripe

Correct

Any appeal is outrageous. He is bang to rights. The tackle was late, off the ball and maliciously high. What exactly is the basis of any appeal? The ban should be increased and Wane should be fined for his comments.

I accept some of the disciplinary panels decisions are baffling but nobody with any common sense can honestly say that in this case the punishment is not spot on.

What is your opinion of Perry's late flop on Lima?

Equally malicious and far more dangerous.

He hasn't been done for a punch though, he's been done for a reckless high tackle when Laffranchi's back was turned. It was a cowardly shot and he's got what he deserved given he's already been in trouble with the disciplinary this season. His mindless action could cost us the title this season.

Is this one any different - www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3180 ? It's also on YouTube if anyone wants to take a look (UqtOnzCEa3M). IMO McGoldrick's looks a lot worse.

Is this one any different - www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3180 ? It's also on YouTube if anyone wants to take a look (UqtOnzCEa3M). IMO McGoldrick's looks a lot worse.

Why change the subject ?

Quote ="Wigg'n"Is this one any different - www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3180 ? It's also on YouTube if anyone wants to take a look (UqtOnzCEa3M). IMO McGoldrick's looks a lot worse.'" Raised elbow to the face. Much worse

Quote ="Wigg'n"Is this one any different - www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3180 ? It's also on YouTube if anyone wants to take a look (UqtOnzCEa3M). IMO McGoldrick's looks a lot worse.'" Raised elbow to the face. Much worse

He is lucky it was deemed reckless as its clearly intentional the consistancy is an issue however it is no justification for his actions and its not an excuse for a shorter ban. I have watched it a few times and it looks worse each time.

ask a non rl fan to watch it and ask how long the ban should be you will struggle to find people saying less than 4.

WTF are you talking about? What a bizarre statement.

lol yep ive shown it to few ppl and they av all said between 5 n 8 none of them were wigan fans so suppose its a bit unfair lol

3 game ban is disgraceful when you consider Ryan Bailey got the same punishment because the ref got in his way!!

Haha! I forgot about that. That's actually hilarious.

i look forward to the same severity of refereeing and disciplinary for the rest of the season,

i think MM basically got 1 match ban for the hit and two more matches for the stupidity and openness of it - if he'd disguised it a little more he would have been playing afterthe catalan game.

Mcllorum should have got 7 games minimum if you go on the basis that the Bailey punishment was fair!! But then again Paul Wood got no ban for punching Carl Ablett in the face completely unprovoked, so god knows how the disciplinary committee works!!

Baileys punishment was the same as Rangi Chase's in the CC against Fev. Dont know how all 3 of those 'crimes' can have the same penalty!!

In reality i think it should have been:

Bailey - Warning
Wood - 3 game ban
Mcllorum - 3 game ban
Chase - 6 game ban

Nah, if you only warned people who touched refs for whatever reason, it wouldnt be too long before its like football with players grabbing refs arms for attention and screaming in their faces etc.

On subject, Wood Yellow Card, MM Red card no ban, Chase Red Card 4-6 ban.

Bailey two game ban.

I remember Hock getting a 5 game ban for grabbing the ref's arm.

tbf to Bailey he ran into the ref accidentally, whilst Hocks was a delibrate contact with the ref.

Why avoid the question?