That info seems to be based on a tweet from Mathers. Nothing official on the RFL site as of 5 mins ago.

No but they were slow in getting the info up yesterday as well Kosh. Sounds about right though knowing the RFL.

Aye. Just interested in how they weasel out of it in the full judgement.

Quote ="cod'ead"Carvell - 1 game - will probably appeal [uMorley - not guilty - go figure[/u'" What a joke ! news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 516811.stm

Quote ="cod'ead"Carvell - 1 game - will probably appeal [uMorley - not guilty - go figure[/u'" What a joke ! news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 516811.stm

Ffs...the RFL need to grow some



Morley not guilty but our boy got a warning letter for trying to get up

The RFL are a joke.

Aye..flipping Wigan & Warrington on sky best not spoil it for the viewers eh

Very cynical of you BB, probably right though

Open season on halfbacks then, Orford last week and now Sherwin

Long and Horne being fitted for head gear as we speak

Regarding Morleys diciplinary Quote Player accompanied by Coach, Tony Smith. Player has less than half a second pull out of tackle. Opponent collapsing at point of contact. Contact on chest. Player was committed. No raised arm. Opponent goes down and ducks into it. Player has both arms out. Unable to pull out of tackle. Original contact was with opponent’s chest. No reaction from touch judge who has clear view. Video ref and official indicate not sufficient to put on report although a penalty was awarded. Decision Not guilty Reasons for Decision The committee have scrutinised DVD very carefully. There was a collision and committee are not satisfied this could have been avoided. The committee are also not satisfied the initial contact was high but was towards the upper part of the body. The player’s arms were out but committee not satisfied this case is made out and find the player not guilty of a high tackle as charged. '" Full details here www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplin ... hp?id=1596

Regarding Morleys diciplinary Quote Player accompanied by Coach, Tony Smith. Player has less than half a second pull out of tackle. Opponent collapsing at point of contact. Contact on chest. Player was committed. No raised arm. Opponent goes down and ducks into it. Player has both arms out. Unable to pull out of tackle. Original contact was with opponent’s chest. No reaction from touch judge who has clear view. Video ref and official indicate not sufficient to put on report although a penalty was awarded. Decision Not guilty Reasons for Decision The committee have scrutinised DVD very carefully. There was a collision and committee are not satisfied this could have been avoided. The committee are also not satisfied the initial contact was high but was towards the upper part of the body. The player’s arms were out but committee not satisfied this case is made out and find the player not guilty of a high tackle as charged. '" Full details here www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplin ... hp?id=1596

Think we should employ whoever Warrington are using at these meetings in future. Carvell gets his ban lifted but still keeps the guilty verdict and fine!!!!!!!!

Have to agree, how the hell can that happen, either he is guilty or he isn't. And how the f'k did Morley get off?

Pish take and more Pish take for sure. I am absolutely Gob-smacked to say the least. What a fecking farce. You just wait until it involves a Hull player: Hame or O'Meley 3 matches or more.

Disciplinary system a complete farce, how can you be guilty one day, and not guilty the next? is it a different panel for the appeal,?

It could well be, I know in most disciplinary cases in the work place it is usually a different person who hears the appeals, so I would suspect this could be the same

What a joke, that's twice in 2 weeks someone has been banned one day and the lifted the next, the RFL are a joke!

Should we start a petition?

Didn't it hapen to one of our players last season? Or maybe the ban was shortened. Personally I'd do away with the appeals. The player and club have the opportunity to put their case forward at the hearing and that should be enough. In fact I'd go to fixed penalties, no hearing. Serve your punishment. Current way of doing things is no disincentive to anyone

Fully agree, I don't understand why they meet one day and appeal the next. Just have the hearing, listen to what the player/club have to say and then make a decision, end of.

I mean they found Carvell guilty, then he appealed so they said ok then you're not guilty

Im wondering the same thing. RFL are a sham.

Following this weekends fixtures it is now apparent that forearm smashes, late high tackles and punches all carry the penalty of a slap on the wrist and no ban. It will be interesting to see how similar incidents are treated in the weeks to come. To find Carvell guilty of a grade C offence which carries 2 - 3 weeks suspension - fine him £300 then rescind the one match ban makes no sense to me

I haven't seen the judgements on either but it seems from news reports and other summaries that the RFL like making themselves look stupid.

The fact is they have still found him guilty and the fine stands. This makes it even more of a mockery.

No surprise there then