By definition for anything other than a grade A offence they have to give a ban. Early plea guidelines say they can only give minimum ban from the range allowed for that grade. They don't have option of fines or warning letters for anything above a grade A if I'm reading guidelines correctly.

Rule 2.9 in the Sentencing Guidlines COULD give a get-out for the panel to step outside of the guidelines AND below, due to mitigating factors.

I'd not want to put any bets on eligible mitigating factors here, though.

And this "early guilty" plea business is just the same as accepting a fixed motoring offence penalty, instead of going up before the beak and risking getting a hammering at the top end of the sentencing options - for having the temerity to contest the charge and wasting the court's time in search of justice. As far as I can see?

Seems that way.

Can he plea? When was his last ban?

Feb 2010.

Disco.

Let's face it, he's going to get a ban for this. It's just inevitable that it will be perceived as worthy of a ban, even though it didn't look all that bad to me at the time.

Might as well make the early plea and accept the one match ban. I think we can manage without him for Salford, especially if Langley can come in.

Can Elima take an early guilty plea?

Yeah. Only thing that prevents that I think is if you've picked up a ban in the 12 months before.

And guess what, he has entered a guilty plea.

One match ban. F*ck.

Surely the game should now be replayed with Bradford only being allowed 12 men?

Better out for Salford than Hull.

Foaming over this. What is dangerous about it? He hits with his should, it wasn't high. It wasn't late as Silverwood didn't blow the whistle. You are told as a 5 year old to play for the whistle!!!!!

On another note this guilty plea is a joke. If we contest it and automatically get found guilty, then the RFL will automatically give a player the maximum ban. We could have had a situation of Elimas getting two games & Bridge getting one game

wasnt fosters challenge just as bad as leading with the knees when a player is in the act of scoring. whithead was already on the floor and i think had collected the ball before foster started to aim his kick.it was reckless and putting an opposition player at risk while not putting himself in too much danger.

I can't help but wonder if it had been BJ that clattered into him, would the outcome be the same? Possibly not, but I'd say that this incident was similar to Sammut in terms of severity so I expect he'll be gone for next week. Not that I agree with it though, there seems to be a lot of minor offences being given 1 game bans. Perhaps time to look at making use of the sin bin for such incidents.