He wasn't sent home by England, but I've recently heard that when he went out for that drink he ended up in a scuffle with a Leeds Carnegie player and that suggests that the Leeds club knew information that perhaps England didn't and why the player withdrew himself (on the demands of his club).....and thus why the big fine thrown at him.

obviously this was only written at 21:14 on thursday though. dont you know anything HIM?

Would any of the well known video sharing sites have a clip on? I've not seen a replay yet.

Brough's allegation seems a little convenient distraction

having watched the game back this morning i too thought that there was something in this tackle,although i suppose it's going to be pretty hard to prove conclusively that zak was bitten,so imo this incident will just be conveniently forgotten

funny how the thornhill p1key showed his hand and said that one of his players had been bitten too to in order to deflect the blame from his vampire team mate


your well off here ferdy as it was like a scene from silence of the lambs....fffffffffff

Ah, so you have heard of Facebook & Twitter then.

So when you said this...

Quote: loiner81 "Ah, so you have heard of Facebook & Twitter then. So when you said this... You probably knew full well what sgtwilko meant below... oh and.. You're the one contradicting yourself.'" No, you've misunderstood. But anywho- it's all rubbish- who'd a thunk it And seeing as you put so much stock in social media - there it is via the RFL. twitter.com/TheRFL/status/595172540668051456

Quote: loiner81 "Ah, so you have heard of Facebook & Twitter then. So when you said this... You probably knew full well what sgtwilko meant below... oh and.. You're the one contradicting yourself.'" No, you've misunderstood. But anywho- it's all rubbish- who'd a thunk it And seeing as you put so much stock in social media - there it is via the RFL. twitter.com/TheRFL/status/595172540668051456

No charge then against the bite by Connor or Watkins it seems.
And no charge against Hardaker for striking.

for such cases as biting and homophobic incidents they usually have an investigation . i think zaks was announced a couple of days after dispensaries had been done so in theory could be announced in a day or 2. i cant see any thing coming off it as no one was protesting about being bite on the pitch. time will tell?

no bite? but it was clear as day in the stills and on the tv replays?

Don't hold your breath sunshine.

What evidence is there to gather? Video (doesn't show anything) and photograph of injuries (probably doesn't have any) this could have been done by now.

Also the rfl never said hardaker wasn't getting charged for his homophobic incident. They just delayed a decision.

Also means that Danny Brough's alleged bite can't have happened either.

Hopefully someone at the Giants will have a word with him about thinking before he runs his mouth off in future.

The RFL are employing the services of a specialist 'mouth reader' who will be tell from very shaky, inconclusive video footage if a bite had actually taken place.

If this specialist concludes that teeth had made contact with skin, the RFL are going to ask the match day official to amend his report to say that he was aware of the biting but decided to take no immediate on-field action.

Then, and only then, with disciplinary action be taken.