This is the only argument so far I have some sympathy with, but I think the idea is that it is constantly rotating panels, from all those available, to avoid the whole issue that everyone seems to be thinking happens week in week out. It just fell on a week when those two were on the same panel. They might not have sat on the panel together at all this season so far and might not again for a while either... but that is sort of the point!

It can't be an easy task for the RFL to fulfil that criteria especially as Piers Morgan spends so much time in the US of A these days.

No, he is joined by Blackpool North Pier and the Central Pier but the South Pier decided it it no longer wanted the job, so disappointingly Llandudno Pier got the gig!

Ok, it peers, I know really!

You simply can't hide your shared obsession with all things X-Factorish. Don't try and fight it, embrace it.

I personally think too many bans are overturned on appeal. The root of this is probably consistency amongst the panel members

Yep and wait till you lot get kicked out of SL because GH does'nt want his players or fans attending your tax evading flea-pit again!

Odemwhingie & King Warrior? Seems likely, given the decision.

Quite right. It is the same basis as our justice system. You have the right of appeal if you believe there has been a miscarriage of justice and you can provide further evidence/argument to support an appeal. It is logical and fair for any appeal judges to be different to the original as they can be more objective.

So in this case they would appear to have taken into consideration (with new video evidence) the fact that what was a normal but tough tackle became a potentially dangerous tackle because the 2nd tackler (Kylie I think) fell off the tackle which caused the collision with the ground to be at a more dangerous angle. They would appear to have ruled that this was not deliberate but accidental. They may also have taken into consideration Buderus's long and good disciplinary record. Buderus was still penalised with a fine and Leeds lost 2 points in the match. Good decision and proof the appeal system works.

I agree but why should it take an appeal to reach this conclusion. The correct decision should be made first time around. If a ban being overturned was a one off occurance then, OK, I wouldn't have an issue with it but when bans get overturned week in week out, it makes a joke of the original process and obviously highlights some major flaws in it.

You're setting me up, right. I get it. I weren't born yesterday you know.

It remains the biggest pile of insincere, contrived crap on TV but still preferable to some Z list dancing competition.

I was going to make that joke, but it doesn't fit my agenda

You should change your agenda. It's not hard to do.

Alright, finally that one made me chuckle