So if he's done nothing wrong why has he received a warning. So there admitting he's guilty. So it's ok to gauge

What does that even mean? At least make the effort to keep your trolling in the ballpark of relevant. It's like you're not even trying anymore.

I'm sure he'd sooner have an inferiority complex than just be inferior like you.

once again our sports governing body has let us down, and made us look silly.

If ablett was a union player he would be looking at a lengthy lay-off, most likely season ending. but we tell him he is guilty (warning letter) but also remind him it was fine to do.

sticking fingers near peoples eyes is never ok and the rfl are a joke for being so soft on the offence. he did it to sam tomkins earlier in the season, he did it twice more in this game, he should not be playing this game for a long time.

At least one of you gets it.

Surely this sort of decision should be a 'policy' based one.

Facials... ... are definitely part and parcel of the game, but we have to be careful that if a player crosses that line recklessly then he should be punished.

What would have happened IF Ablett had injured Manu in this incident; I understand that he didn't and it's ifs and buts, but have you got to blind/severely injure someone to get a ban?

wow... words fail me. How can he get a warning?
Disgusting from the RFL.

It would appear so.

I would also propose that should such an incident occur, that resulted in a career-ending injury, the lax disciplinary procedures at the RFL could possibly bring them into the frame when it came to litigation

Gaz Hock gets a 5 match ban (I think) for doing something similar, wonder if he feels agrieved by the RFL?

The difference in judgement between Hocks and Abletts was that whilst Hocks was judged to be a deliberate gouge (and lets be fair, it was as clear as it was ever going to be) Abletts was judged more of a wild grab from a prone player. There was a clear difference imo between the two offences.

Saying that, i think we need it (like a lot of things in the game im afraid) that there is a duty of care to other players in the game and the onus is on each player to not make it any more dangerous than it is.

Relative to Hocks (and not forgetting Hocks disaster of a disciplinary record which will have been taken into account when judging his ban) I can see why Ablett hasnt got a ban. As a personal preference I would have wanted to see a much bigger ban for Hock and a small ban for Ablett

Just an awful decision. If one played gets a 5 game ban for it then so should another. Disgusting policy from the RFL. Ablett got away with a disgusting hit on Tomkins in 2010 as well, he should have been sent off at the very least!

Hock's was not judged to be a deliberate gouge. Also, his disciplinary record would not count against him. Only incidents of a similar nature are considered as major aggravating factors. Other incidents of foul play are occasionally considered if they are frequent but Hock's ban for making contact with the match official didn't count against him as it's a separate type of offence.
Hock had only been banned once (for one game) for any sort of foul play or violent conduct up until that point so his record wouldn't have counted against him. If I'm not mistaken Ablett had 3 matches for elbowing Tomkins and another 1 match ban for a dangerous tackle so the disciplinary records had no bearing.

Why should Ablett have been sent off for a mistimed challenge when running at full speed chasing a bomb. The worst challenge of the 2010 season bar none was Ratboys brother, ASBO Joel trying to smash a prone Richie Mylers cheekbone as he lay on the floor. Absolutely disgraceful and premeditated yet worthy of just a warning from the RFL. Short and selective memories you pie eaters.

So where was Tomkins 3 match ban for a deliberate push on the referee before confronting him to berate him about 'getting in the way'

you cant have it both ways!

He never laid a hand on him. Stop making **** up.