What an absolute farce. It's worrying that in the eyes of the RFL pushing an official is more dangerous than potentially crippling somebody.

This "early plea" rubbish is good, but surely this warranted at least a hearing such was the potential for a significant injury, RFL looking like a joke organisation again, sommat needs sortin and quick.

Considering bailey's ban this is a joke surely, intentional or not it requires more that a phone call saying hands up I got it wrong, but I have been a good boy previous bla bla bla blad di da

Clearly depends on who you are and what your reputation is like had it been TMFMISL he would have copped at least 6 games.
The early plea is a joke, if you admit to it early and youv'e been a good boy doesn't alter the fact a players career could have ended.

Stuart Dickens of Fev said in League Express that a it's very hard for a semi pro player not to take the "early plea" because you get a reduced suspension and no fine, yet if you fight the charge and lose you get a longer ban and a fine.

I'm struggling to think of any British based player who has had his career ended by foul play since I started following the sport back in 1982. There may be one or two, but I genuinley can't think of them.

I don't like spear tackles but they are not a problem in the game as far as I can see that needs darconian punishments handed out. I also can't think of any repeat offenders that blight the game. As I remember (and I stand to be corrected) they "appeared" on a regular basis back in the 80's in Australia as a way of taking out playmakers etc. and there was considerable concern for a while until the league got it's act together and cracked down on them.

It's all about prevention.

The risk element to a spear tackle, driven head first into the ground is obvious what the outcome could be.

So let's hope no careers are ended with this needless act.

I think the issue here in the comparisons being made is more that Bailey should never have got 3 games rather than how lenient they have been on Lestrange.
Bailey maybe 1 match at most.
Lestrange 3 games for an early plea and previous good record.

Agreed Chapy.
Let's face it, Ryan Bailey attracts as much, if not more, hate from "other" fans as Gareth Hock of Wigan.
His mere presence on the pitch is enough to warrant instant dismissal and a one game ban in the eyes of many who do not appreciate his subtle skills,particularly in handling match officials.

Then so far it's working without rediculous bans.

I don't believe there is a single professional player who thinks they are acceptable tackles or who would like to spear someone if they could get away with it, but you could have 24 month bans and prision sentences and you won't stop every case of a hot headed BDL getting carried away every now and again.

So the "Bailey" ban is now the gold standard for disciplinary rulings is it?

It's working more by luck than judgement.

As for the 'bailey ban' it's not the gold standard. But highlights the foggy ideology of the RFL. Where the brushing of a ref can be 'rewarded' with a heavier ban than a reckless, needless, bit of play.

The Bailey ban was in my eyes ridiculous, although in some ways I don't think he helped himself with his manner during and after the incident. Still, a warning at most for me. It was nothing like the Gareth Hock one a few years back.

Lestrange's ban however has absolutely bugger all to do with the rights and wrongs of Bailey's suspension. 2 games for me is right. It acknowledges the poor technique but also that it was clearly unintentional and that the player showed immediate remorse. As I said earlier, I think inadvertently Hargreaves was just as much to blame.

JP in camp bloodbath it seems.

Tweet:

Jamie Peacock ‏ @JamiePeacock10

Bails gets 3 match's for pushing a ref so he can make a tackle, I nearly break my neck and a 2 match ban is adequate..

Does a player have to end up in a wheelchair before this kind of offence is taken seriously by the disciplinary panel??

Two completely different offences, each with their own grading scale for potential punishments.

Comparing them is pointless.

FWIW I don't believe L'Estrange was being either deliberate or malicious. The ban he's got is about right and sends the message that if you lift a player in the tackle it's your responsibility to see him back down to the ground safely.

Clearly Peacock believes it was deliberate, which is entirely his right. It's not my view, and clearly neither was it the view of the disciplinary panel. If it had been deliberate, I would have expected to see a ban of 5-6 games.

Rugby league is a high impact collision sport, and occasionally players are going to end up in positions that are unsafe and prejudicial to their future health. As a player who has made plenty of contact around the head/neck area of opponents over the last few years, I would have expected JP to take a more pragmatic view.