Strong words from Neil Hudgell this morning, probably the first and last time I will ever agree with him. www.hullkr.co.uk/club/news/artic ... e-Chairman Look at the two clips of the tackles in this article, and tell me why the three players in the first got off with a caution and the player in the second got three match ban? They both look the same too me, the Whiting one a little worse. They is no wonder the players and coaches get frustrated with the ref's.

Strong words from Neil Hudgell this morning, probably the first and last time I will ever agree with him. www.hullkr.co.uk/club/news/artic ... e-Chairman Look at the two clips of the tackles in this article, and tell me why the three players in the first got off with a caution and the player in the second got three match ban? They both look the same too me, the Whiting one a little worse. They is no wonder the players and coaches get frustrated with the ref's.

Let's hope they don't miss it

The disciplinary system is a complete joke.

3 man tackle with pile driving technique such as the Whiting tackle, no issue.
Farting in the scrum = 5 match ban.

I'm sick to death of it.

Bring back the Biff....

"It is time the match review panel stood aside as they are not fit for purpose.

This week whilst Justin Poore was cited and suspended for 3 weeks for a dangerous throw, three Widnes players received cautions for a dangerous throw on Richard Whiting. I invite anyone to review footage of both, and point out the difference.

I believe the throw on Richard Whiting is far worse, yet when being questioned, the review panel explanation was that as they couldn't spot the culprit, all escaped with a caution. On Twitter last night, even the referees considered it was an incident possibly worthy of a red card.

In a week when a player in Australia suffered a serious neck injury, this reasoning is without logic, damaging and irresponsible. It brings the game into disrepute and challenges the whole integrity of the competition. It is infuriating and demoralising to us as a club to be on the receiving end of a flurry of these decisions. We have tried to deal with them in an appropriate manner, behind closed doors, but the same mistakes continue to be made.

It is six weeks into the season and we have already been on the wrong end of three inconsistent decisions. I do not have an issue with my players being cited for infringements if we are dealt with consistently. But that has not happened, as acknowledged by the RFL as recently as two weeks ago.

Justin Poore was cited for Grade B punching at Huddersfield, whilst a Giants’ player was not cited, even though the panel later acknowledged they had missed this player throwing three punches. Another Giants’ player was cited for a Grade A single punch and escaped suspension, but when it was pointed out to the panel multiple punches had been thrown they admitted to also having missed that.

In the same week a Catalans player ran after an opponent at Castleford to throw a punch and escaped with a sin bin. Kris Welham was cited for a head butt in round 3, whilst a head butt by a Salford player the same week was overlooked. When later pointed out to the panel, it was acknowledged as worse and that when contact was pointed out to them on video that it was "missed".

A leading international player this week avoided censure for repeated punching in the tackle, shown live on Sky Sports.

Only a change in personnel, I believe, is capable of effecting the right change, and I call on the executive of the RFL to do that before a player suffers serious injury as a result of their inaction. I fully expect the governing body to accuse me of bleating, and my simple answer to that is to ask them to review the incidents identified above and provide a clear explanation for their actions. Instead of attacking the symptoms they need to tackle the cause, which sadly is lack of knowledge, understanding and core competence.

We certainly as a club aren't alone in expressing these frustrations, and I share fans’ disillusionment which is becoming an increasingly regular feature on social media. Sadly those views systematically fail to register highly enough in our game, as they were ignored when the whole restructure of the game was under review. The same can be said of the players as a group.

I also share the views of Adam Pearson on aspects of the disciplinary panel process. There are too many members sitting with vested interests, lack of knowledge, and an arrogant, high handed ‘holier than thou’ attitude. I am fed up of walking into the panel hearings and leaving with a sense of having sat talking to the wall, or being looked down on with the outcome stitched up long beforehand. We will certainly be making a formal complaint about the conduct of the panel chairman last night who disbarred an executive of this club when making submissions in respect of this case that he simply didn't like.

There are too many people with too little knowledge of the technical aspects of our game making decisions they are clueless about, ruining the spectacle of our game, bringing it into disrepute and driving people away from it."

I'm glad someone within the game has finally had the balls to say something !!! They are a joke and have been for a long time.

Nice one Neil. He's obviously weighed up that the inevitable fine, for whatever pathetic rule breaches the RFL determine, is worth paying if saying something publicly can make any type of change.

I've never been one to jump on the back of refs who do a tough job in a high speed sport, and are bound to make legitimate mistakes*, however when a group of 'mates' on this board can't be consistent when they have time and video evidence there's something deeply wrong about the system and it needs changing for the good of all SL teams.


*I don't count Ethiad Gansongate in this - he's just a useless prat that deserves all the criticism he gets

The RFL has issued the following statement in response to recent criticism of the sport’s disciplinary systemsRFL Director of Standards and Licensing Blake Solly said

In my opinion nothing in that addresses any of the concerns raised by Neil Hudgell's own statement...

However, it does highlight a combination of complacency and self-satisfaction...

Blake Solly is not going to turn around and state that they've been getting it wrong for the past 50yrs!

They've not listened in the slightest to what Neil has said and have just come out with a defensive statement. When they address the points individually I will be happy to listen to them.

I wonder how much he'll get fined after Dr K has set the precedent?

There's nothing new about problems over inconsistency in disciplinary system, whether wilful or just poor design. Having said that I thought things are a bit better than they used to be.

Unfortunately the disciplinary system is one area where the RFL has considerable discretionary power over clubs, and for that reason there will always be a reluctance to move to something genuinely independent, where interests and personal biases are removed as much as possible.

I personally would go with a much wider review panel who have been trained to understand each offence, each member gets a copy of the video and has to independently watch and grade each offence and then submit their decision. These are then collated centrally, and the submissions of panel members who have an "interest" in the club affected are excluded (but retained for analysis). An "interest" would be along the lines of the panel member being a current or former employee of the affected club, a known supporter of the affected club, or being an employee of a club that will play the affected club in the next 4 weeks. The average response for valid gradings would then be the final grading for charging the player. This might sound complex but in the modern world a pretty basic app could be written to pull it together. All the panel member has to do is watch a video each week and fill in a basic online form, they don't need to worry about whether they have an "interest".

Once the offence is graded the player/club can submit a plea. If they contest the grading they appear before a panel selected randomly from members who do not have "interests" who can reduce the grading or dismiss entirely if sufficiently convinced.

Any penalty is then based on set points for offence minus a set deduction for an early plea, plus a set number of additional points based on previous disiplinary record.

The video clip and the final grading can then be banked as evidence of precedence for similar offences. This can be used to regularly refresh the training of the panel members on what each charge looks like.

As much as possible this system separates out the grading of the offence and the final penalty. Each offence is judged on its own merits and accrues points on its own merits, and the penalty is not arbitrary.

The RFL statement looks like a standard pre-written response. I'm sure I have seen the same statement issued by the RFL sometime last season!!!!

The RFL have been dragging the great game of Rugby League back for too long!!!!

As an FC fan it is not often (if ever) I agree with Neil Hudgell, but on this occasion he's absolutely bang on the money. The sad thing is that he'll likely get no support from his fellow chairmen or directors of other clubs, the players union will say nowt and the fans will be completely ignored or at best passed off as not understanding the game.

Blake Solly's statement in respect to the disciplinary process being widely regarded as the envy of other major sports is a downright lie, I've had some experience of Red Hall disciplinary meetings at an amateur level and they are a joke. You have Hicks running around like he owns the place and treating everyone like they are dogsheite, the panel members are so out of touch it is embarrassing. The whole process stinks and should have been updated years ago.

The game of rugby league is evolving, unfortunately the morons at Red Hall are unable to keep the pace, so their natural instinct is to restrain it and pull it back. All this after the successful world cup should have seen us forging ahead.

Sorry, but I've just about had my time with the professional side of the sport, it is not the product it was. Time to walk away and concentrate solely on amateur Rugby League.

Blake Solly is a complete and utter joke. His job position is "Director of Standards and Licensing" and here is what the licensing report had to say about Bradford and the grade B he gave them...



How did that work out, Blake? Shouldn't you have looked into those plans a little deeper?

So anything he says should just be ignored. The panel is a complete shambles and as inconsistent as they come, it needs a major overhaul...in fact, everything at Red Hall needs a major overhaul.

Transparency?! It means we can see right through them.

Anyone seen @RugbyDiscipline ?