Mick weyman suffered a 2 match ban and a £300 for foul and abusive language to "referee" tim roby at castleford on sunday,making it a day to forget for the robins.

Looking at Wehman's disciplinary report, he said "you f***ing c**t" to the ref.



[urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?5408[/url

No proof, guilty.

Reason, the official said he did.

Exactly.
Joseph Stalin himself would be shocked.

Only according to the ref there is no proof apart from that. Even the report says as much.

All joking aside that means a ref can make up anything he wants and it stands now then?

'He swore at me!!'
'No I didn't prove I did.'
'Don't be silly we don't need to. Have a 2 game rest'.

Aye, player says he swore at team mate, team mate confirms he swore at him.

Referee says he swore at him despite it not being picked up on his microphone.

Judge Judy would have said something along the lines of; "Robert, but everything is about you, have you considered that people talk to others and exclude you? For being stupid I rule in favour of the defendant and demand you apologise on national TV before handing in your notice."

So let me get this straight.

You don't need to be looking at the ref, be anywhere near the ref or be conscious to be accused, found guilty and punished for foul and abusive language towards a referee. The referee just has to accuse you.

I think if there was no evidence to suggest it either way, there should just be an appropriate punishment just for using foul and abusive language on the pitch. The only certainty in Weyman's case was that he did use foul and abusive language. A 500 quid fine and a warning over future conduct should be enough.

It gets better apart from Weyman admitting it there is no proof he did actually swear.
What would have happened if Weyman had said 'Actually I didn't swear at all'?
The same result no doubt which means that as long as a player is seen talking near to a ref (Even if they are not looking at him) then every player on the pitch is open to a 'The ref said so' disciplinary.

Michael Weyman has just today changed his name to Jamie Peacock in order to avoid such bans in the future.

They don't let you change your name to such things as God, Jesus or Jamie Peacock.

Clearly a cast iron case against Wayman. The most clear.......and only case of foul and abusive language against an official this round....or all season.

We do need to use this to motivate not destroy us as it did Sunday.

The RFL and their monkeys are so mature that the more you point out their failings the more personally they take it and go after you.

How Wayman kept his hands off Roby I don't know. Credit to his professionalism.

Be careful or you will upset the animal anti cruelty brigade by associating the two species in the same sentence.

What about Peacock, the video evidence is absolutely clear as to what he said, but he never even got called up. One rule for one and one for Leeds as usual.

2 match ban and £300 fine, a bit harsh just for telling the truth!

No I checked this out, it's possible providing you go through an RFL panel made up of members of the Hetherington family. Seems a fair system to me.

That's the point the RFL cleary missed.
If I was going to lie I wouldn't say I swore but it wasn't at the ref. I would say I didn't swear at all.

Does it? Where?

Its been changed, it definitely did when i read it at dinner time

He got what he deserved. Definitely saying it to the ref, clear as day on the video he was addressing roby, horne was nowhere near.

It's a bout time this abuse of referees was clamped down on. Hopefully hardaker will get a long ban and a big fine and the refs grow some nads and start sending off any player who does it.

What did he say Rolf?

It's already been posted what he said. it was on the RFL website earlier freddie

Thought as much. Thanks Rolf.

You're welcome freddie. Anything for my little stalker

How can I be the stalker when you are always on here Rolf?