Totally agree Stan, I have a few good friends who are Cas fans, and they are as bemused about this whole sorry state as we are!

The wilfully reckless leg whip is your interpretation. But the video evidence is equally consistent with other interpretations, including it being an unfortunate accident. The failure of the panel to entertain this possibility, compounded by the withdrawal of the EGP, going outside the guidelines and Hudgell's allegations means it looks and feels like a stitch up. That is my interpretation.

I want to see fewer players injured, and there might be a case for making an example sometimes - but it has to be a good example, with less ambiguous evidence and more robust process.

A more robust process.....at the rfl, not when you can......spin spin spin the wheel of justice see how fast the b#stard turns.......this week avoid the 2 matches plus 2 for moral indignation from associate of the victim...oops you hit it...spin again for a free appeal...unlucky no appeal for an offence with a 2 game sentence. Random regrade of sentence means spin again......yep 4 games for a grade b ...early guilty plea.... spin again.....no early guilty plea...unlucky your out of spins. Next week......more spins ( please note Leeds and Wigan get to bring their own wheels known as the justice reform wheel which offers rehabilitation and minor fines for repeat offenders).

That seems a bit of an over-reaction. I get why Hudgell is ranting, and I suppose part of that is to bring the players together "back to the wall mentality" but he was a bit OTT in my opinion. Could have toned it down a bit and been more professional

If the bit about them inadvertently revealing that they'd pre-judged the appeal is true, then he might as well give 'em both barrels.
It's one thing'knowing' it, another actually seeing it.

I very much doubt the panel has been influenced by Powell's comments. As a coach who has just seen his captain suffer a serious injury he believes was caused by an illegal challenge, he has every right to voice his opinion. To think the panel take his, clearly biased, opinion into consideration is ludicrous.
It would be interesting to know if the panel had sight of footage that has not been made public. Both clubs will have filmed the game and this footage may be clearer, hence the certainty of two panels that the tackle was illegal. I personally don't think the Sky footage is conclusive either way and if this is the only footage used by the panel, I think the player has been hard done by.
However, if the other footage is clearer then the ban is fully justified.

It was a statement that only a lawyer could write. Strong, measured, passionate and ever so slightly thought provocative. Exactly to be expected from someone who operates in his specific line of legal practice.

Why go soft on the RFL? In these parts we all tell it as it is, non of that PC nonsense.

Somebody needs to rattle the RFL cages and hard, because their incident interpretation, their decision, the length of ban given for it and their subsequent rationale for it smacks of injustice or rough justice. They are looking to send out a signal to the rest of the league, but they have picked the wrong tackle and wrong example against which to do it. Darryl Powell's intervention and Michael Shenton's sad and unfortunate injury influenced and predetermined any initial panel review and subsequent appeal outcome. That's unfair and Neil Hudgell was right along with JP to drive this message home forcefully.

The only other footage is from the grassy knoll Boudebza was stood on with his rifle.

I'll give you a clue.....there is no other footage...none nothing.....none what so ever.

It's my understanding that Cas film all home and away games independently for video analysis, as do most other clubs.
I have no idea how the panel have found Boudebza guity if not.

Well it'll be interesting to see how the panel see that tackle on percival

I don't think Jamie Peacock and the club would have made such statements if they had been show other footage of the tackle confirming intent and a 4 match ban.

So let's get this right. In your world Cas or a n other have video footage conclusively showing Boudebza deliberately fouling a player causing a year long injury. The rfl see it and ban him for 4 games following charging him with a grade b offence.
No one from the rfl bothers releasing this film to justify a bizarre changing of their own rules and controversial decision.
No media organisation bothers to show it. Cas don't release it....it's no where on social media.
Our Chairman clearly hasn't seen it.
This has been a tragic episode for all involved.

Well after watching the Salford match, Percival was tackled in the same manner as Shenton last weekend. Percival has gone off injured with crutches. Shall we see what the outcome is!?!

Completely different scenario though where one man was tackling another who was running, not coming in as 3rd man when the tackle was already effected. They'll still probably ban him though to avoid the danger of flying dummies from east hull

Same referee as well.

Percival was being chase tackled moving forward and the player tackling from behind was swinging off the ground to halt his momentum until an additional impact front on with another tackler adds extra pressure on the knee when Percivals forward momentum is stopped. No malice, no intent, same type of tackle, similar unfortunate outcome, similar lack of reaction from the Saints players. Not put on report, nor should it have been.

I have been watching and supporting Rugby League since the mid 60s, seen this tackle thousands of times and seen hundreds of adverse injuries to player outcomes.

You are an idiot.

What are you on about? This tackle was very similar. Your black and white specs are steaming up, you'd best give them a wipe.

Has this been investigated by the Metropolitan police yet?

The sheer determination to abuse every post he puts up is beginning to amuse me after months and months of being bored and annoyed.

Not for another 30 years and then they'll take their time.

It really wasn't. Were you all rushing to sneyd's defence last season when he accidentally rolled maguire's ankle?

Absolutely no comparison in the two tackles but I thought at the time that some one on the HKR forum would try and justify Boudezbas tackle on Shenny by mentioning this.

I see we've found the real reason why you're in the minority here. So your basically just stirring the $hit because of something that happened last year that's burnt away at you all this time.

I think the main comparison is that in both a player ended up injured and neither were illegal challenges.

I beg to differ. The only outcome is Percival might miss a few matches, not a season. So shall we say.....2 games? Looking at it, the player tackled was very similar to last week. In other words, it was 'unfortunate' and 'not in the spirit of the game'. But a player is injured non the less, so let's up the grading and give a ridiculous ruling, and let that be the end of it.