Nice to see the panel being as consistent as ever, Roby pleads guilty for a blatent spear tackle but gets off with a fine, Is there a big game due soon or something

Jon Davies not on report but lands a one match ban and £300 fine for this: Law: 15.1(i) Detail: Dangerous Contact – Defender uses any part of his body forcefully to twist, bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player: Grade B

Ryan Atkins just a caution for this:Law: 15.1(i) Detail: Dangerous Contact – Defender uses any part of his body forcefully to twist, bend or otherwise apply pressure to the limb or limbs of an opposing player in a way that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to that player. Concerning technique requiring Caution

MMMMmmmmmm alot of difference there then

Delboy66(aye of the tigers fanzine)

Yep. As usual Cas get no favours from the Disciplinary.

In fact, what is more dangerous.....a 'dangerous throw' where the player landed forcefully or what Davies did? I'm sorry but if Roby wasn't binned he should have had a game ban for that tackle.

Football, regardless of what it is, a dangerous tackle is served with a yellow card. Same rules should apply to rugby league.

Oh come on now! No way was that a spear tackle. Your player was not driven on to his head or neck; he was dumped on his upper back and his legs flew into the air. It was a careless tackle but not a spear. Cunningham had a spear done on him at Leeds a few seasons ago and he was dazed for ages. The player was given a two match ban.

James Roby had never been before the disciplinary panel before and should not have been before it today either because Blake Green (HKR) got away with exactly the same tackle on one of our players the week before, receiving only a caution (no charge).

And Saints have had three bans this season; two of which Saints fans still have no clue about what our player actually did on each of those occasions (Perry was banned for one match for having a one on one fight with a Crusaders player - and how many players have been banned for having a one on one fight this season?).

The inconsistency is there for all to see, both on and off the field. But to claim that Cas is somehow badly done to is plain ridiculous.

I can't claim that i have seen the roby incident so cannot comment on it however out of everyone at the disciplinary tonight he got the biggest fine yet no ban, even howell only got a £300 fine for biting (and a ban) surely if roby wasn't worthy of a ban he shouldn't have got the biggest fine www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... ml&BID=480

I can't claim that i have seen the roby incident so cannot comment on it however out of everyone at the disciplinary tonight he got the biggest fine yet no ban, even howell only got a £300 fine for biting (and a ban) surely if roby wasn't worthy of a ban he shouldn't have got the biggest fine www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... ml&BID=480

Eh? Roby was up for a Grade A charge - that's the lowest charge of all. All the rest were for Grade B's (1 to 2 match bans) or in Howell's case a Grade E (and he was banned for six matches).

So ... Roby was up for the lowest level charge which at worst carries a one match ban, which the panel clearly didn't think was appropriate for the tackle.

Roby also has never been before the panel and is a very clean player. I can't remember the last time a penalty was awarded against him. Within the RFL's guidance is stated that the previous record of a player is taken into consideration when making a judgement, as is intent (or lack thereof).

The £300 fines come with a ban. The £500 fines are stand alone punishments.

As I said i can't claim to have seen the incident, i am not having a go at Roby i am having a go at the inconsistency in the disciplinary panels fines and bans etc. They just don't make sense how can he get a £500 fine for as you say the lowest grade offence, one week someone is pulled in and fined an offence then next week another player gets a warning (even if they have been a regular visitor to red hall)

The sooner we get to a system like the have in australia the better all the players and fans want is transparency

Saintsfan, you're argument is lost on us mate. You're using the fact Roby has a perfect disciplinary record as an excuse not to receive any ban. We'd probably all argue YOUR case usually but since only a couple of weeks ago Chase was up before the panel and he too had a perfect record yet he got a TWO MATCH ban. Don't take this argument personal on your team, on Roby, or on the incident in question. We're just sick to the fecking back teeth of always having our players some how come off worse than teams such as wire, Saints, Wigan and Leeds. Especially when the next game is a big game where we always get a player suspended and the big boys always seem to have their guys get a birthday card with a marks n spencer voucher inside.

Agree 100%

Never in a million years was that worthy of a ban. It was a Grade A offence, Roby admitted wrongdoing, there was no malice and he has no previous. Fine, yes, ban, no. Each case is judged on its own merit.

Is it me or does every club seem to think they're unfairly victimised by referees and the judiciary panel?

Football's growing over-use of yellow cards is not something I want RL to replicate to be honest. Every tackle that's half a second late or from behind is a yellow card offence these days. Gets right on my nerves.

I also don't like the idea that all offences against the same law or reg (see above where the quoted charges are the same because they're the same reg, they don't discuss the offence itself.

As much as it leads to accusations of inconsistency, I prefer each case to be treated on it's merits, with past records considered as circumstantial. I also see no reason not to adjust fines based on a player's salary. £300 to a young lad in his first season out of the academy is not, in effect, the same penalty as £300 to an established pro who is a current international.