RFL Disciplinary panal

Quote: Him "I agree with that. It's that inconsistency, both with the disciplinary and reffing in general, that gets people annoyed.
Maybe when viewing incidents and making decisions on punishments the panel should view previous, similar incidents from that season and see what punishment was handed out then?
'"

But where do you start? Do you say from next week, we have no previous crimes, and will start to build a catalogue from now? Or do you take the current incidents from this year? I would argue there's been too many contradictions already. Nothing but a clean slate would be able to make this work, even then, no two incidents are ever gonna be the same. Any high/late challenge would simply point at Matt Bowen in round 1, and there'd be no choice other than 0 games and a fine.

Quote: Him "
Like with the refereeing, law changes and interpretations on holding down etc I wish we would just decide what we want and then implement that for a set amount of time (say 3/5 seasons?) and then have a review to see what was good, what needs changing etc. instead of the constant change we seem to get.
'"

This is inconsistent for me, given there are many on this board who will constantly praise the NRL for it's innovation, slowing down our interpretation will just double those NRL gazers. Of course it's ridiculous that we even have 2 different bodies using separate rules - in an ideal world the RLIF would be the ones passing down the "innovations" each year, for which the NRL and super league (and any other professional league that May one day exist) uses. Of course, we can't even get grassroots to international under the same organisation at the moment, so I'm not holding my breath.

Quote: Him "
In a slight bit of defence of the disciplinary, some people do get wound up for no reason. The recent Jordan Tansey ban for instance was slagged off on here because he got a different length of ban to Hock, yet I think everyone would agree that a players past record, be it good or bad, should be taken into account when deciding a ban.'"

In my personal opinion, a lot of people seem to be accusing the rfl/ disciplinary system a lot of things. The accusations of having an agenda seem a bit silly to me - what agenda could possibly be gained through this system? Surprisingly, the piece from sky sum up how I feel on the matter as a whole: yes there are inconsistencies, and yes, more details into the process of "sentencing" would be nice - but there isn't some evil plot to take down <insert team who lost and feel aggrieved the ref penalised them here> - the sky piece:

www1.skysports.com/watch/video/t ... -many-bans?

Refs in all sports make mistakes (anyone who saw Chelsea vs Arsenal knows that) and I would fully agree the standard of reffing is poor at the moment, but it's not in favour of anyone. Mistakes tend to balance out over the season and no team loses because of the ref (they don't miss the tackles etc) - no matter what they do, refs are gonna get accused of everything under the sun, it's part of being a fan.