They should look at Tompkins kicking Danny from a different angle then.

On the locked Buderus thread ( Tetchy or what??? ) over on the Wigan forum a genuine question was asked, in defence of thug Tomkins

"Did Tomkins make contact with Danny Mac?"

So it's OK to kick out, swing a punch, attempt to trip etc etc as long as there's no contact???

Wigan clearly have the highest number of ts and muppets of all the forums

Well lookey here.

Day 1 - the ban is given
Day 2 - the ban is revoked

Even as a Leeds fan I think this is just stupid. Either he was guilty or not and given he was banned he was clearly seen to be guilty.

Whats that RFL, someone has hidden your balls again? Poor babies.

More of the rotating of hookers to follow. Deep joy.

Were the 2 ex-Wigan coaches on the appeal panel?

I know this is good news at least. We need Buderus and Diskin to be on there game again.

No the appeal panel consisted of Mrs K.Buderus, Mrs K.Heatherington and Mr R.Rhino

and elbows???

A victory for common sense.

Spot on, why on earth didn't they look at all the angles on the first hearing, then they could have come up with the right decision in the first place.

Just makes them look really really stupid.

This is already been covered under the conspiracy theory thread but...

The disciplinary panel is always different from the appeals panel. The panels are done on a rota system some way in advance of the meetings to ensure that people are available.

It did so happen that two (of the three) people who had strong Wigan connections were on the disciplinary panel, this is not RFL bias or conspiracy but just simply how it worked out on the rota!

This is why they have an appeals system and it is also always three different people who look at the incident afresh. The three people on the appeals panel did not agree with the original decision of the disciplinary panel and they overturned the ban... simple!

Because they are three different people and they have reached a different decision... that is the point of the appeals system. They don't look stupid, the disciplinary panel thought one thing and the appeals panel thought another thing... they are just opinions.

But who's to say the appeals committee's opinion is any more correct/valid/accurate than that of the disciplinary committee's. All the chopping and changing does make a bit of a mockery of the system - not just in this case but in every case that this happens.

The process needs to be made more objective than subjective. Whether or not a ban is appropriate should be a black and white case - not down to an opinion of a group. There should be better guidelines drawn up regarding how bans are handed out and they should be stuck to.