I used the term 'pivotal players', not players in pivotal positions. I also used the term 'homegrown' more generally to include players who had at least spent time in a club's academy system. Along these lines quite a few Bradford players can be counted as homegrown and pivotal e.g. Fielden, Peacock, Deacon, R. Paul, Pryce etc. Struggling to think of any Warrington players in this bracket other than Paul Wood & Ben Harrison who are solid but not pivotal.

I would also argue that with the exception of Henry Paul, none of the players you have mentioned were especially big names before they signed for Bradford. The extra training they received at the Bulls made them better & pushed them into international contention. Ben Westwood and to a lesser extent Chris Bridge have improved in this way but you are still behind on the numbers Bradford managed back in the day.

To come back to the original topic, I do find it quite amusing Bridge's advocates doubt him capable of malicious intent on the grounds that he isn't a dirty player.

This is the same Chris Bridge who was cautioned for affray after punching a bouncer who justifiably refused to let him into a club because he was too drunk isn't it? Just checking...

An Old hack should know he was just tired & emotional?

That's how he learnt to lay down as fast as he could using his elbow for a cushion.

Grade B intentional strike. Up before the RFL plods tomorrow.

Looking forward to these being held at Odsal in future years.

Early plea, 1 game.

Is there a public gallery at these hearings? I reckon they could get a good turnout in the Coral Stand.

Make it part of next year's pledge package.

2 game ban just come out Should be more for the thug but hey justice is partially served!!

More RFL pro-Bulls bias. Raynor gets 2 games for deliberately knocking our greatest player unconscious, Bridge falls on a Bulls players chest, with no injury, & gets the same. It's a joke.

2 games. Seems pretty fair.

www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3375 It says one there.

www.therfl.co.uk/disciplinary/item?3375 It says one there.

Seems like it would be two if he contested it, but it gets dropped down to one for a guilty plea.

To me, the fact that he's admitted he was in the wrong (after earlier denying it on Twitter) is more important than the length of the ban. A longer ban doesn't do us any good.

I would also hope to see Alibert given a one game 'rest' this week as he saw the incident (otherwise why did he give the penalty?) but didn't even go so far as to put it 'on report'

I thought it was a nasty, intentional and malicious in the moment, but otherwise basically a brain fart. One match is plenty.

Is there any real necessity to put it on report if it can all be reviewed later at leisure?

I would rest whoever the winger was who was out of position for the Riley try.