Suspended 1 match, fined £300.

fc should appeal imo, nothing to lose

Typical!

and a sh-t head get away with elbowing and nothing is done ..No wonder the rest of S/L dont like Bailey

www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 21,00.html

www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 21,00.html

They must have taken a dismal view to him punching a player on the ground , even though he was provoked.

Yellow cards for the pair of them at the time would have been more apt IMO.

Should have been Sending off Sufficient.

Gutted for Radders, mind he'd have been banned for punching Cockpayne on Saturday anyhow



Least he'll be fresh for the following week

Out of interest, did Wellens get away with his 2 forearms smashes?

Radford to be Knighted,

it's effectively a 2 match ban when you consider he got sent off after 8 minutes. WTF!!!!

barrie mac, robbie paul, terry o connor, iestyn harris, our local rag, and a few others FWIW all agree a red card was OTT - so he gets a 1 match ban on top.... absolutely ridiculous IMO

No Charge for Slug

I find it difficult to accept the Referee putting the entire incident on report, yet Ryan Bailey launched himself at Sean Long in an outrageous head butt attempt, and he was never even called up to answer it. No wonder RL fans have suspicions about Red Hall.

Makes you wonder, is it just cricket and snooker??

Got what the thug deserved

indeed. 4 stitches from one punch is quite pleasing

Would've been funny had you were the first to use the above.

He'll get what he deserves for his dirty play yes.

Oh hang on you are talking about Bailey aren't you blinkered boy

You’re response would have been funny had it been in English fool

Chill man, he's only trying to wind people up.
Quite successfully it would seem.

Bailey is a moron, crap rugby league player supported by retarded west yorkshire kn0bs!

Very grown up. Is 73 your IQ?

no my age

I know exactly why he's here and deserves all that he gets thrown back to him.

The ignomy of being roundly ignored?
I've never got the whole 'lets have a go at the troll' thing, surely that is the aim of said troll?

I'm far from an expert on these hearings, so does anyone know who represents the player and what other evidence can be brought in mitigation? The reason I ask is that everyone seems to be aware of all the other similar instances to Radders' situation and the associated inconsistencies and yet these are obviously overlooked. This can only be for two reasons - either the procedures do not allow for such evidence to be brought forward, or whoever represented the player didn't use them strongly enough to make a case.

That said I've just remembered a third, and more likely scenario...that whilst Rugby League has a cracking product on the pitch it is administered by a set of plonkers whose history of making poor and inconsistent decisions beggars belief! (Generally speaking!)