No charge.

i agree fully with you, most fans are left baffled week in, week out by decisions of the disciplinary and the refs. watch any match live or on tv and you are left in total amazement at decisions that are made. one team gets penalised for any offence , whilst the other team do the same and get a way with it.
trying to understand the disciplinary committee would take the combine minds of worlds cleverest individuals. below are two players cited this week.


Punching in 34th minute (Dobson)
Decision No charge
Details of Charge / Reason for NF Player reacts to tackle from opponent, throws ball at opponent but no punches, referee caution appropriate

he is charged with punching, but then it is said that he didn't punch anyone !!!


Use of forearm in 10th minute (Radford)
Decision No charge
Details of Charge / Reason for NF Player attempts to regain feet and play the ball, forearm makes unintentional contact with opponent, provokes opponent but no misconduct

i wont comment to much on this further to say almost everyone saw his elbow strike radford, but the committee didn't.

these decisions can been seen weekly on the rfl site.

Hang on when you face the Wire the next week very confident are you... lets put it this way playing against KR is not going to be easy for you and it will be a very tough battle, and if all our players come through this week with no injuries then the game is there for the taking.. For Rovers

Serious question, not trying to wind anyone up, but, do you think the seriousness of any matters like this are upped because they are seen live on TV ?

Because I do.

The footage is more conclusive, which again is another example of our game being played under 2 sets of rules

FWIW, i feel radders has been very harshly dealt with for this incident..
.
for those that think bailey wasn`t cited , this is from the rfl disciplinary page
..
ON/637/10
Name Ryan Bailey
Club Leeds
Shirt Number 16
Match Hull FC v Leeds
Competition Super League
Date 04/09/10
Incident considered Use of forearm in 10th minute (Radford)
Decision No charge
Details of Charge / Reason for NF Player attempts to regain feet and play the ball, forearm makes unintentional contact with opponent, provokes opponent but no misconduct
...........
i personally feel that bailey did this act intentionally, then their was the attempted head butt and then the fact he was being aggressive again and failed to walk away and came back to aggravate the incident again, this alone i thought should of warranted a card of the red colour.

so i do feel for radders for his harsh treatment but after seeing how our respective clubs have been treated before the rfl this year ,this decision is by no means a shock.

Me too, especially as the TV games are filmed in better quality than the non-TV games (see SLShow for examples). That said it beggars belief that the full incident appears to have been glossed over, despite what appeared to be the whole tackle/punches/brawl being put on report as it was in the Hull Rovers game.

I think that could be a good point and the RFL always like to look tough for the media. Once Bailey was no charge to answer the judiciary where always going to back up the Refs decision.

I do think that a player with no red crads in his career to date has been treated harshly, time was when a players previous was taken into account.

Still I look forward to playing Leeds away next weekend and Radders meeting Bailey again

Yep confident I am. We are at home with virtually full strength team. It will be tough but yes I am confident. I am sure you feel the same.

We should appeal. The fact that even Rovers fans are posting that the punishment is unfair in the context of the maximum penalty and Radford's virtually unblemished record is definitive evidence that it's overly harsh.

But they know nowt

Not only that, the leeds fan I work with reckons Bailey was having a deliberate go and Radford was hard done by. That said I understand most of the leeds fans have excomunicated him for not toeing the party line that Bailey is more worthy of sainthood than Mother Teresa and Princess Di all rolled into a big bundle of fluffyness.

My thoughts exactly which I repeated ad nauseum to anyone who would listen on Saturday night. At least one of those elbows hurt him badly for the red mist to descend to that extent. We all know Lee (THMISL) isn't shy to come forward when necessary but it's usually in a controlled way. Never seen him blindly lose it before. Sure there was already a lump under his eye as he emerged from the scrap - that elbow made a big connection for it to cause immediately visible damage like that.

Hull must appeal - there'll probably be no Leeds game (nor Wire or anyone else) for O'Meley to get a chance to do any ironing if Radford's not there to intimidate Vella next week. Nowt to lose by appealing - literally everything this season to lose if we don't.

Lets face it, if its Leeds - they will get away with all kinds of dubious things both from a playing perspective and as we all know, disciplinary kinds.
Hull will get hammered, always have always will.
The RFL are painted in blue and yellow.

I'm going to e-mail the RFL. Complete waste of time I know but I'm crosser than Nobby right now.

That's cross!

I feel as Mad as a Madwoman in a Madhouse, too, though, so think I'll e-mail the sanctimonious one-eyed hypocrites as well. Was certain he'd have got SOS.

I wouldn't expect fireworks again, as both players kissed and made up after the game. This can be seen in the background during Sinfields interview on Sky.

I have to agree ! whispers behind closed doors at red hall!

and revenue from one of the biggest play-off gates this week!

hit a man on the floor. you get whats coming

How is that going to happen?

Only chance of that is surely if Crusaders beat Huddersfield?

If all the home teams win this weekend then IIRC the games in week 2 will be

Leeds v Huddersfield
Warrington V Hull

I hope Hull appeal and Radford gets to play in the derby. Vella didn't manage to do much intimidating at Wrexham and actually dropped the ball at fellow Maltese international Sammut's feet enabling him to run 90 meters to score.
Dobson is like Sammut, sets up and scores a sensational try at one end and then forgets how to tackle and stand and watches the oppenents walk in to score at the other.

still

i see, 15 posts and all commented on HULL FC

The problem is that the RFL have deemed Bailey's elbows to be accidental (taking benefit of the doubt to its furthest extreme, but there you go). Now if you look at what Radford did as unprovoked, then it seems pretty bad. You should still appeal, as they can't increase the penalty much further. While they won't admit to being wrong, they might back down a bit on the punishment and cite his good previous record. Slim chance though as that is your only argument and you've been denied the stronger one of provocation.

It has been confirmed that Hull are indeed appealing.