Sorry but if you're just going to keep on making the same incorrect point about Leeds appealing appeals there's really no merit in continuing to discuss this with you.

I'm not a leeds fan. Used to admire Saints but no longer. The incident was a deliberate foul action by Knowles which could so easily have broken an opponents arm or dislocated his shoulder - a disgrace that his ban has been overturned.
"Integrity" and the "RFL disciplinary committee" should no longer be mentioned in the same sentence.
Shame on you, RFL.

100% agree Saints will probably win their 4 in a row but that legacy has been forever tarnished now. Games should be won on the pitch not in corners whispering in peoples ears offering threats or worse incentives to change the rules in your favour!

Not going will stop you watching the great player Knowles is. Don't cut your nose of to spite your face.

I don’t think it’s corruption, just incompetence of the highest order. For a start I think they’re too incompetent to be corrupt…

Why you upset with Saints they appealed the decision and won, Your beef should be with the RFL. very petty

NEWS FLASH:

Mike Rush has words with the MRP and manages to twist there arm to get Morgan off with his ban.

But that’s just the point isn’t it - it couldn’t easily have broken an opponents arm because it has been proven to be within the normal range of movement. Have a scratch of your back, see how far your arm moves then watch the incident and see how Knowles is holding the arm rather than forcing it anywhere dangerous. I don’t think anyone seriously thinks he was trying to hurt him rather than just hold his arm to slow a PTB.

I think the disciplinary is a farce and I wouldn’t have cared too much about a ban - it didn’t look great even though I don’t think it was forceful or dangerous.

But if it can be proven that the arm wasn’t forced / used as a lever in an unnatural position then there was no danger - it seems the RFL has caused itself an issue with the nature of the charge around unacceptable risk of injury being unsupportable when challenged.

I also think Atkin made a nonsensical meal of it too which we don’t want. Was it him trying to get Roby in trouble for a non/existent crusher also or another Salford player?

The disciplinary is clearly rubbish and needs to be professionalised and shaken up. As for the rest about corruption, tainted titles (for the team finishing top and simply having an appea be successful) and other tin foil hat nonsense - I think people need to get a bit of a grip.

but you said earlier in the week it was stupid and deserved a ban.
changed your tune now

Just shows that old saying needs adjusting to "Don't count your chicken wings" a disgraceful decision that shown the inept and , possibly corrupt nature of our sport's governance. even as a Hull fan, I'll be screaming for a Rhinos victory come final time.

In the context of what has been banned this season I thought he’d get a ban. I also thought it was stupid as there was no need for it knowing how trigger happy the disciplinary have been.

But I can’t honestly say I think that it was dangerous or likely to cause injury or was done with any intention to do anything other than slow a PTB. So in terms of the challenge to the appeal I can absolutely understand why Saints focussed on that element and why it’s been accepted that what Knowles did did not give rise to an unacceptable risk of injury.

I still think it was stupid because it gave risk to a risk of a ban - which it did - but I don’t think it was any more dangerous than all sorts of things that happen to slow down a PTB.

It’s all a total mess. If it helps speed up change in the disciplinary system then good but it’s created noise and anger that needn’t have existed.

St Helens have form for it .

Even a leading NRL physio and injury analyst has questioned the decision. It’s stinks and has undermined the RFL’s integrity.

There’s many Saints fans online saying the same thing..

Next year we can all look forward to cynical coaches and players incorporating the "the back scratch" into the wrestle, sorry tackle. What a wonderful spectacle that will be. These decisions have consequences beyond one players ability to play in a final. So sad that an act that any right minded human being, never mind a follower of the sport, would recognise as potentially dangerous, is now allowable. Sure it will attract legions of young kids to the game.

From what I can gather, Saints took a sports scientist to the second appeal and he’s basically said whilst pressure was put on the joint, there was no realist chance of 'serious' injury.

So basically, that’s my verdict as a professional so you can’t argue with it. They’ve just crumbled and it’s pathetic.

Opened up a massive can of worms this now

I think the bottom line is that what Knowles did doesn’t look great but didnt carry an unacceptable risk of injury (or indeed any risk of injury) and wasn’t a Grade B charge. I suspect has he been charged with a Grade A with a different justification the ban would have stuck.

If you think about it rationally - player holds player’s arm in a tackle in a way that is annoying but not dangerous, but could have been dangerous had he used any force or leverage, but he didn’t.

He’s picked up a yellow card for something that had he behaved differently could have been dangerous, but he didn’t.

He’s then picked up a grade B and two match ban for something that had he behaved differently could have been dangerous, but he didn’t.

I think in those circumstances the most obvious comparison is when a player looks about to lift a player over the horizontal but then doesn’t, it’s not a ban because he almost does something dangerous.

I’d almost rather he’d been banned to be honest - just to avoid the controversy detracting from the game. But in a game that already had numerous sub-plots we now have another at least . . . . .

We’ll see in the minutes I guess. I doubt it was about “serious” injury - it will be about risk of any injury.

Double post

Sickening this, RFL looking corrupt and inept.

I hope we are considering legal action both for our treatment this year which is clearly now prejudice against us, and a legal block against Knowles playing in the GF

As much as I think this decision is utterly farcical, the club just need to get on with it, winning it would be even sweeter now.

I'd imagine most neutrals in the ground on Saturday will voice their support for leeds now.

Correct. Squads today. Hoping for some good news.

What RL player has a "normal" range of movement in their shoulder. I would say 70-80% could not naturally put their arm in the position Atkin's had his arm put into due to shoulder injuries.

How many more cm's did Knowles need to lift Atkin's arm before it exceeded the "normal" range of movement. Will referees be taking a ruler and protractor onto the field before assessing any future chicken wing tackles to ensure the RFL's credibility?

The simple fact that Knowles performed a chicken wing tackle should have been sufficient for a ban as every players body would or could react differently to that sort of illegal tackle. It is not up to the judiciary to speculate whether it could or could not cause injury as every player would react differently to their arm being placed in an unnatural position.

The first time we tackle Lomax we should bend his arm behind his back and dislocate his shoulder. Give away a penalty but take Lomax out of the game, there’s no way they could give anything more than a penalty for that now.

Dear me. Surely you don't really mean that?