No-one is saying that in an aggressive game such as Rugby League punching is fine but it is going to happen especially when the guy that tackles you shoves his elbow in your face ,what do you expect them to do suddenly switch off the adreneline ,it doesnt happen.If Rangi had come running in then Yes he deserves a 2 match ban ( but others havent as mentioned ealier Coley only got a one match ban for running in and punching) that is imho a premeditated move on his part however i question whether sundays incident wasn't just a reaction to the elbow.
The appeal is this afternoon at 4pm

Delboy66(Aye of the tigers fanzine)

The RFL are a joke, Im still fuming about this, no consistancy at all

dont know what all the fuss is about . let rangi have a rest before the run in . This weekends game would be an ideal opportunity to blood another youngster (brierley) and show that cas are not a 1 man team.

I suspect tttiger the concern is more around him missing the cup QF than the trip to Crusaders.

And Brierley won't play regardless. It'll either be Mathers back and McGoldrick replacing Chase or Dean Widders will move to stand off.

Somewhat off topic, but I think we have done the debate to death until the verdict:
It should be like the old days where we could hastily arrange a friendly mid-week next week against Glasshoughton first school or something and let Rangi serve the second match of his suspension then. Or loan him to whatever championship club play next Thursday so he is still back for the CC quarter!

Good post there MD. I have just seen the incident again and Chase throws two punches in reaction to being hit whilst on the floor. Even allowing for the retaliatory circumstances, if the RFL were doing their job properly, fairly and even handedly, you could accept 2 matches in the name of trying to clean the game up.

However they are not applying even handedness and anything like consistency and in comparison with many other offences this season it is in fact very harsh. There have been quite a few cases that have been worse and either got just one match or let off completely. Furthermore many of these did not even have mitigating / retaliatory circumstances as an excuse. If some of these had got say, 4 matches then you could have accepted the 2 matches.

This is just one reason why so many fans within the game have such a poor opinion of the RFL and get their backs up with them. And that low opinion is unfortunately not just confined to the corridors of our sport itself, it is an opinion that proliferates within the sporting world in general. They just change the laws and punishments to suit whoever it affects, with a bloody minded attitude.

They so blatantly operate the one law for one and one law for another stance, without as much blinking an eyelid.

Good to have Zimmerman back!

Where can i see the incident? can people keep this post updated on the outcome as im at work

how can they even say there trying to clean the game up when they lets game go without doing anything

A nice rest for the Crusaders game then

poskittc Cposkitt
1 game!!!

'Tis true

Conspiracy theory!

Give a 2 match ban knowing an appeal will come and reduce ban to one game so as to miss the RFL's sponsored team.
If only a one match initial ban then would have had to be fine only on appeal.

Transparency at Redhall means we can see right through them!

Many a true word spoken in jest as they say

I'm gobsmacked. I'm glad there was no betting on the outcome as I would have had money on it not being reduced. They do have a conscience after all.

That's what I said would happen!

I think that's fair.
And for those who are expecting consistency from the RFL - don't hold your breath will you....