Not denying that im just saying he went up before a judge who will be experienced in these types of assaults and he passed the sentance he felt the incident warrented. I know Ben did wrong but its not his fault what sentance the judge passes down to him. The problem is with the judicial system in this country

Simple answer is, 'no they wouldn't have', nobody has heard of the player that was sacked and he ws probably a very average player.

My first post on this thread, what he did was awful and thats being nice. To kick anoher human being in the head and keep on doing it, words can't describe.

Is this the same Cas that chased Ben's signature during the winter even though he had pleaded guilty?

Yes it is, but this Cas fan did not want him, im all for second chances after your punishment is done, just seems to me - so far hes walking away scott free . If it had been joe public they would be behind bars now .

But surely you realise that neither Cas or Rovers knew the full extent of the seriousness of the violence two years ago?

All they knew is that an assault had taken place and the pair had pleaded guilty.

The full extent of the atrocious nature of the violence has only come to light during the trial, thanks in part to the CCTV footage only recently revealed.

Rovers or Cas cannot be blamed for signing the players "with this hanging over them". What they are accountable for is how they deal with the situation now it's enormity is revealed.

Cas have sacked their second rate player. As I have stated previously, Rovers are in a slightly more tricky situation as if they sack the thug, someone else will have him. The RFL MUST act to ensure no club have that option.

The fact that the thug has shown no remorse and instead has blamed his actions on a "flashback" to the time he served in Iraq (doing what, exactly?) should only make this easier for them.

Wrong, again.

Really? Did both clubs have access to the footage when thay signed the players?

Go and find out for yourself.

So you dont know !

I know that WIH comment isn't strictly true, yes.

You seem to be insinuating that your club did indeed realise what they were dealing with.

If so, then yes, no signing should have taken place and yes, indeed, this whole show of "meetings" and "discussions" is irrelevant.

So ARE you making the assertion that Rovers knew all?

All I'm saying is that you're wrong in what you've stated, like Kath H, I don't have to comment any further.