Or extended to 4 matches, knowing the RFL

I didn’t see conclusive proof of major force to the head from the video on the day - hopefully he’ll have it reduced but doubt it to be honest.

Don't be so frivolous. 6 match ban for you!

Appeal failed. Stays at 3 matches

So every single appeal last week, and every single one this week apart from Lisones was successful? Hmm

Beyond caring.

Have we ever successfully appealed a charge?

Macdonnell last year when Lomax claimed he was punched

I don't believe it's a conspiracy.
It can only be that we're rubbish at it.

What a farce. Best players getting suspended for minor infringements. Paying spectators are certainly getting bang for buck!

They'd probably be better just scrapping the MRP and just going with set punishments.

Something like:
Red card = 3 match ban, no fine.
1st yellow of the season = fine.
2nd = 1 match ban
3rd = 2 match ban and so on.

Give the clubs the opportunity to appeal any red cards, and perhaps leave the door open to extend bans for more serious foul play,but take as much subjectivity out of the process as possible.

I dunno mate it's complicated isn't it? A red card within the first 5 mins is a far bigger punishment than a red card with 5 minutes to go. Equally a red card in a final is way more significant than in a league game.

I'd like us to move away from these broad brush punishments. Sending players from the field shouldn't be the standard response to any infringements - fines are another. I think we need a more sophisticated and consistent process for administering the rules. How the hell Lisone is a 3 match ban is beyond me, when I've seen far more dangerous/intended tackles go unpunished or punished less. The only thing I can imagine is that Minchella had some player testimony or something and reported being whacked hard from behind, I don't know.

It shouldn't have made any difference, but Smith's post match interview on Sky accusing the HKR players of play acting may not have helped.

I certainly don't envy them for having to take all these factors into consideration. They also use the mouth guard data to determine the force of the impact, so although it was given as low force on the field, the mouth guard data may contradict the original assessment.

To be fair, Smith did clarify his comments in the press conference, but I don't know if that was factored into the judgement.