Forget about Dwyer now. O’Connor is the first choice 9 and should play big minutes. He allows the halves to shine more…..

Oh I agree and have voiced my thoughts on Dwyer for a long time. My more human side also has some empathy for him.

Originally two then three on the back of an appeal deemed frivolous. Yet seemingly ok now.

And yet another disgraceful decision not to ban Pearce.
No wonder the games in a mess.
Have they decided on the fine they are going to give Catalans for throwing objects at the players and referee?

I don’t feel sorry for him. Has performed well for us, but not the skill set for tight playoff footy. He’s also got a good deal at Hull next year so doing good…..

Napa has also been banned for two games and Pearce for one.

To be consistent I think the Cats bans are OTT. Dudson barely made contact and one game max would be fine as far as I'm concerned.

Yeah we can’t have it both ways!

I'd say two is correct. OK it's different disciplinary eras but Sinfield got two for his famous headbutt which was probably marginally worse - but he had a clean record. You simply can't lean in with the head no matter how light the impact.

sinfield got 3 but it was when you had 1 game reduced for an early guilty plea, but could only use it once

Dudson will serve a game in the preseason friendlies. Though maybe we could lodge a frivolous appeal on his behalf..

We are the experts.

wonder how many other teams have had an extra game imposed after appealing?

I cannot remember who but I seem to recall one player from another club getting a ‘frivolous extension’ but think all other appeals have either ended with the original ban standing or getting a lesser grading and ban being reduced…which in my view is how it should be….you either win or lose the appeal, this frivolous argument is BS

Quite agree, certainly the use of the word frivolous is banal in the extreme. More like failed appeal would be more appropriate.