So according to the RFL it is quite alright for a Saints player to smack someone in the face - that is a truly appalling decision.

Here how they see it -

"Player intentionally has a jab at the Wakefield player and as such is guilty of misconduct; however the Panel are giving him the benefit of the doubt that contact with the eye is accidental and as such consider that it is appropriate to deal with this matter by way of a caution"

Quote ="IngsRoader"So according to the RFL it is quite alright for a Saints player to smack someone in the face - that is a truly appalling decision. Here how they see it - "Player intentionally has a jab at the Wakefield player and as such is guilty of misconduct; however the Panel are giving him the benefit of the doubt that contact with the eye is accidental and as such consider that it is appropriate to deal with this matter by way of a caution" '" Nowt up with the soft 5hite www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/inju ... 05926.html

Quote ="IngsRoader"So according to the RFL it is quite alright for a Saints player to smack someone in the face - that is a truly appalling decision. Here how they see it - "Player intentionally has a jab at the Wakefield player and as such is guilty of misconduct; however the Panel are giving him the benefit of the doubt that contact with the eye is accidental and as such consider that it is appropriate to deal with this matter by way of a caution" '" Nowt up with the soft 5hite www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/inju ... 05926.html

Intentional and therefore guilty of misconduct but accidental that he went for the eye. What was he aiming for the floor? Or is it okay to threw a punch at someone's head now!

It's not this one particular case that grates on me it's the perceived biased towards a couple of teams/players which still seems to exist. Take Peacock at Leeds for instance and then compare with the bans handed out for the Quins v Catalan game last season.

The RFL are getting worse by the decision

Lately players seem to be getting away with alot. I think we need to mke the game more attractable to new players and their parents. Surely the RFL's decisions in the last few weeks cannot be reassuring the parents of their child's safety?

Least they got the Demetriou one correct which was obvious to see it was a fend that rose to the face.

I do wonder if it is only Fakir that gets a ban from the clowns as he i think is one of the only players to get a ban (other than howell) in super league this year. Just sad its going to take a serious injury to a player for them to realise imo

Maurie got a ban early in the season for a "chicken wing" tackle.

But there does seem to have been a lot less bans handed out this season, but I certainly don't think the game has become any "cleaner" to lead to that

Quote ="Rommel"Nowt up with the soft 5hite www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/inju ... 05926.html'" Whilst you are a real tough guy or are you as I suspect a gobsh*te ponce.

Quote ="Rommel"Nowt up with the soft 5hite www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/inju ... 05926.html'" Whilst you are a real tough guy or are you as I suspect a gobsh*te ponce.

I expect no less from the bunch of clowns

I've no problem with that decision at all.

Had the injury been a bad one though I would have expected a ban.

No surprise about what Cunningham did and no surprise about the rfl decision. It's rugby league get on with it.

Agreed.

An why is everyone calling it a punch - the bloke had a rugby ball in his hand for gods sake - it wasnt a clenched fist.

To be fair, its a pretty bad decision.

The RFL is run by a bunch of incompetent buffoons, did'nt you know?

Why ? This was a very minor incident, and should Stosic have just got up uninjured we would have nothing to complain about. I cant see any problem in what happened, Stosic was all over FATBOY who wanted a quick play the ball, and just over reacted.

If you follow the logic through of the decision it means it's OK to punch someone (after all a 'jab' is a punch) even though they can't defend themself (a.because they weren't expecting it b.they have no free hands) as long as you don't hit them in the eye



Sounds like the RFL are advocating a Coward's Charter

How many players have thrown punches this season?
How many have been banned?

It's Rugby, an aggressive game by it's very nature. Punches WILL be thrown and tempers WILL flare. It was wrong of Keiron to react, but it will happen. Glad Stosic is OK.

Punches are thrown in fights, that wasnt a fight it was a player on the floor...

Punches will get thrown in nearly every game! But it's the cheap shots like that we don't need.

In fact several punches this season and in previous seasons have been thrown by marker players on the player going to play the ball, that is not a fight, that, similar to KC situation, is a cheap shot. No ban.

That is why you see them more often.

Possibly, or possibly just because players are getting with blue murder in the ruck area these days. It's a mess, look at the NRL, their's is brilliant at the minute, probably down to the two refs idea.

If the RFL wanted to cut out this type of thing, then they should have clamped down on it earlier in the season when it was happening. Now they have to be consistent in all incidents now and afterwards, otherwise the defence of Cunningham if he was charged would be to take tapes of these incidents and the disciplinary reports and ask what the difference is.

www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary.php When did we sign Simon Grix?

www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary.php When did we sign Simon Grix?

Other than revenge what would a ban do to help Wakey. Now he has been cleared he will play against Quins next week and Wigan the week after.

I realise this could be strange logic but at the end of the day not getting a ban could do Wakey the biggest favour.