| |
| FORUMS > The Virtual Terrace > RFL Disciplinary panal |
 |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Star | 4239 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2013 | 12 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jul 2024 | Jun 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
实事求是！: |
|
| Quote: FLAG EDGE TOUCH ""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."'"
F*cking A.
I'm glad someone from within the game has finally slammed them. | | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Star | 4239 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2013 | 12 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jul 2024 | Jun 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
实事求是！: |
|
| Quote: FLAG EDGE TOUCH "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'"
Complete cop out.
Go f*ck yourself solly. | | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Owner | 14306 |  |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Sep 2003 | 21 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Oct 2024 | Sep 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
7063.jpg
"They supercede individuals, they supercede the team and they supercede the club. Our club is a traditional, working class club and the supporters are loyal and passionate and to see them go away happy really makes my day." Craig Sandercock.:7063.jpg |
|
| Quote: Leaguefan "There is an easy solution to this.
Players should not foul other players and learn how to tackle. They may then not be penalised and brought before the panel.
A bit radical but you never know some players may learn!'"
I see you've totally missed the point. Players do silly things from time to time they are human after all. What we'd want is for all humans to be punished consistently for the same things not one rule for one human and another rule for another human. | | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 14970 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2002 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2021 | Nov 2021 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
2244_1299706258.jpg
:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_2244.jpg |
|
| Quote: Easty "I see you've totally missed the point. Players do silly things from time to time they are human after all. What we'd want is for all humans to be punished consistently for the same things not one rule for one human and another rule for another human.'"
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?
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.
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. | | | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 2757 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2003 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Oct 2022 | Aug 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
Ex Hull KR TV season pass holder.Ex HKR lottery member. Ex Hull KR half season pass holder.: |
|
|
If RL fans cant see that what Hudge said is correct then they deserve the sport to be as it is now, consistency isn't too much to ask is it for the game ??
| | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 5214 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Aug 2006 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Sep 2024 | Sep 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
27476.gif
 I am the hash browns of rlfans :27476.gif |
|
|
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. |
|
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. | |
|
| | | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 10518 |  |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Aug 2002 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
2597_1613407166.jpg
This world was never meant for one as beautiful as me.
WTRLC 2012 to 2014 "The wasted years"
Magic Weekend "Whipping Boys" 2013, 2014 & 2015
2017 - The year the dream disappeared under Grix's right foot.
2018 - The FinniChezz Bromance
2019 - The return of the Prodigal Son.
2020 - Keeping the faith.:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_2597.jpg |
|
| Quote: Magic Superbeetle "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.'"
I have to disagree. I believe, even if it's unintentional, refs do favour the bigger team or in some cases the home team.
In a tight game the referee's interpretation does influence the result.
The weaker (poorer?) the ref, the bigger the effect. We have three stand out poor refs at present. | | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 3592 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Sep 2005 | 19 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Apr 2019 | Sep 2017 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
18016.jpg
www.artwanted.com/traceydixon
[img:145n7m8w]http://i101.piczo.com/view/3/z/y/a/f/0/z/d/x/z/3/5/img/i291262489_17198_4.jpg[/img:145n7m8w]
[url:145n7m8w]http://www.flickr.com/mortonstalker[/url:145n7m8w]:18016.jpg |
|
| Quote: gutterfax "icon_lol.gif ![]()
Good, reasoned response, well done.
I just shared a relevant link, sign it or go play nicely 
| | | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Star | 39 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Aug 2013 | 11 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Dec 2014 | Jul 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
: |
|
|
I can't state facts but rumour has it that there is a Hull FC president on one of the panels. Also I think George Fairbairn has sat on the panel.
Now I'm not accusing either of those people of being biased but if the Hull derby was a week later and one of HKR's best player was up before him for something that someone else was given just a fine for. It may be too tempting for the HFC president to hand down a 1 match ban.
Like I say, I am not questioning the integrity of these men but to say there is 100% no agenda against any club could and probably is wrong. Some people do have vested interests in some SL clubs and so may look at their rivals players more than their own.
| | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 2757 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2003 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Oct 2022 | Aug 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
Ex Hull KR TV season pass holder.Ex HKR lottery member. Ex Hull KR half season pass holder.: |
|
|
Match Review Panel as advertised by @TheRFL Mr S Ganson
Mr P Dixon
Mr S Presley
Mr M Burnett
Mr N Shuttleworth
| | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 14970 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2002 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2021 | Nov 2021 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
2244_1299706258.jpg
:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_2244.jpg |
|
|
Magic Superbeetle -
I agree, it still relies on the disciplinary panel handing out the right bans but I do wonder if they think about previous incidents or not. I'd guess not simply as a time issue.
I'm not particularly bothered what the NRL do. And I don't believe we should immediately take up something they do just because it's the NRL that's done it. I think we have a problem with rules and interpretations (and the disciplinary) changing year on year and I don't think that's a good thing. I'd far rather we implemented changes every so often, then looked at them over a period of time ie more than just one season or partial season. During that time, if the NRL has tried something we can also give that time to see how it works in the NRL rather than have to decide immediately whether to implement it or not.
Because things like changing interpretations on holding down etc can drastically change how a season is played by many teams.
I agree entirely on the villification of the RFL and refs. Accusations of agendas and conspiracy theories are as daft as some of the theories going around about the missing plane.
I wish the RFL, the disciplinary and the refs were better. But I don't believe there to be a conspiracy against anyone or any club.
The problem, I suspect, is a lack of money to either get the right calibre of people in the right positions or to set up proper procedures and processes.
But, of course, more money to the RFL means less to the clubs.
| | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Owner | 17898 |  |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Oct 2003 | 21 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Mar 2020 | Aug 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
7384_1394882426.png
[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/14252202:io879g1y]2005 Challenge Cup[/url:io879g1y]
To reconcile respect with practicality, what is the optimum speed for a hearse?:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_7384.png |
|
| Quote: Magic Superbeetle "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.'"
I think Rovers from Magic Weekend last year might disagree with that. | | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 999 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| May 2009 | 15 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Apr 2014 | Apr 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
icons3ae4_files/4637-1859san_c-msnicons.jpg
:icons3ae4_files/4637-1859san_c-msnicons.jpg |
|
|
the referees making mistakes I can deal with, they have a split second to make a decision, when you have video evidence and 'they missed the incident' or at your hearing you can't back up your argument with a video because they already know your punishment is bollox. poore deserved a ban, but how can widnes get nothing for a tackle that was worse and more dangerous because they couldn't identify the culprit, JOKE
| | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Moderator | 12646 | |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2007 | 17 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
33809_1522680904.png
'Thus I am tormented by my curiosity and humbled by my ignorance.' from History of an Old Bramin, The New York Mirror (A Weekly Journal Devoted to Literature and the Fine Arts), February 16th 1833.:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_33809.png |
Moderator
|
| 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.'"
I think there's a case both for taking into previous behaviour and also one for judging each incident on its own merits and not 'punishing twice'. Either is fine and we have the EGP system. I'm not clear on whether the policy is to consider previous behaviour over and above EGP. I'm not sure the panel is always clear on it at the moment either.
Complete consistency is very, very hard to achieve. If Poore had got 3 games and the Widnes player (whichever one was most culpable) 2, then I'd have curled a lip and put it down to a subtle difference that the panel could see but I was blinded to by my club bias. Or Poore's previous record. But 3 vs 0 is 'odd'.
Also, if NH's representation is anything like right and they are simply missing important stuff, that's a bad joke. I notice the platitudinous RFL reply doesn't reject that claim. In game a ref can miss something very easily, but if the camera catches it and you've got a panel of people with a rewind button they really shouldn't. | | |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 7343 |  |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Oct 2004 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Oct 2024 | May 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
10025.jpg
For contributions, remittances, payments, and all other matters of any responsibility, please refer to someone else.
“The British people love a good hero and a good hate”
Lord Northcliffe:10025.jpg |
|
| Quote: Wollo-Wollo-Wollo-Wayoo "I have to disagree. I believe, even if it's unintentional, refs do favour the bigger team or in some cases the home team.
In a tight game the referee's interpretation does influence the result.
The weaker (poorer?) the ref, the bigger the effect. We have three stand out poor refs at present.'"
I think it's just human nature, we all have cognitive biases, and even if as a part of their role refs work hard to control theirs they are still human. They are still prone to the same suggestions as everyone else and hold prior beliefs like everyone else and even just on a subconscious level that can affect them. | | | |
| | |
|
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
Copyright 1999 - 2024 RLFANS.COM
You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.
Please Support RLFANS.COM
4.138671875:5
|
|
| POSTS | ONLINE | REGISTRATIONS | RECORD | | 19.65M | 1,681 | 80,155 | 14,103 |
| LOGIN HERE
or REGISTER for more features!.
When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
|
RLFANS Match Centre 
| Mens Betfred Super League XXVIII ROUND : 1 | | | PLD | F | A | DIFF | PTS |
| Wigan |
29 |
768 |
338 |
430 |
48 |
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
| Hull KR |
29 |
731 |
344 |
387 |
44 |
| Warrington |
29 |
769 |
351 |
418 |
42 |
| Leigh |
29 |
580 |
442 |
138 |
33 |
| Salford |
28 |
556 |
561 |
-5 |
32 |
| St.Helens |
28 |
618 |
411 |
207 |
30 |
| |
| Catalans |
27 |
475 |
427 |
48 |
30 |
| Leeds |
27 |
530 |
488 |
42 |
28 |
| Huddersfield |
27 |
468 |
658 |
-190 |
20 |
| Castleford |
27 |
425 |
735 |
-310 |
15 |
| Hull FC |
27 |
328 |
894 |
-566 |
6 |
| LondonB |
27 |
317 |
916 |
-599 |
6 |
| Betfred Championship 2024 ROUND : 1 | | | PLD | F | A | DIFF | PTS |
| Wakefield |
27 |
1032 |
275 |
757 |
52 |
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
| Toulouse |
26 |
765 |
388 |
377 |
37 |
| Bradford |
28 |
723 |
420 |
303 |
36 |
| York |
29 |
695 |
501 |
194 |
32 |
| Widnes |
27 |
561 |
502 |
59 |
29 |
| Featherstone |
27 |
634 |
525 |
109 |
28 |
| |
| Sheffield |
26 |
626 |
526 |
100 |
28 |
| Doncaster |
26 |
498 |
619 |
-121 |
25 |
| Halifax |
26 |
509 |
650 |
-141 |
22 |
| Batley |
26 |
422 |
591 |
-169 |
22 |
| Swinton |
28 |
484 |
676 |
-192 |
20 |
| Barrow |
25 |
442 |
720 |
-278 |
19 |
| Whitehaven |
25 |
437 |
826 |
-389 |
18 |
| Dewsbury |
27 |
348 |
879 |
-531 |
4 |
| Hunslet |
1 |
6 |
10 |
-4 |
0 |
|
