Not unbelievable at all. I expect hudgell fully anticipated it. He may be partly or even 100% right but if you want to complain then there are proper channels and you have to use them or face the penalties under the processes laid down.

You would not be surprised if the governing body did not agree with his views, (whether they are right or wrong) but if things have got so bad that club chairmen have no other recourse than to publicly slag the governing body, what is the object of that exercise?

Is it to make the governing body think, "Yes, we are shiit, we will all resign"? Well, if it did, then the tactic would have worked.

But if the governing body feel they intend to continue to govern, then what else did or does anyone expect them to do? Is it realistic to think they would just take the spanking lying down and let it go? No, it's not. And anyway, maybe it is what Hudgell wanted. Since if he spoke out and was not up before the beak, but yet nothing changed, then exactly what would he have achieved? At least if there is to be a hearing that gives him a platform to continue the debate and to publicise his points.

He deserves every penny of it. The match review panel have a boatload more technical RL knowledge than the ambulance chaser, even the example that he chose was a dumb play to the crowds.

The sad thing is it's not a surprise he will get this fine. We all know there is no consistency with the decisions the panels make. All you have to do is look at the example hudgell brought up himself.
I think its great chairmen come out and say things as the RFL don't listen to the fans at all but at least they have to pay some interest in what the chairmen say.
And then fine them for doing so

Whoah there. "We" don't. You don't speak for all fans. Obviously this disciplinary panel would have many critics, but then so would ANY disciplinary panel, making ANY sort of decisions on a mixed range of things with a mixed range of accused.

I don't think anyone is claiming either that it is perfect or incapable of being improved but if you think there could ever be a panel that would somehow have universal confidence and trust then let's just say I don't share such naivete.

I don't think that, overall, the case for endemic inconsistency is remotely made out. The disciplinary deal with a whole bunch of cases and the overwhelming majority pass without comment.


but again, it is just disarmingly naive to suggest the governing body or the disciplinary should "listen to the fans". Just think about what you just wrote for a second. WHICH fans? As half (for example) think Ferres should never have been charged and is innocent, half ant him banned for life (I exaggerate for effect but not that much).

What you mean is they should listen to that section of fans who agree with you on given decisions. And you mean they should ignore those fans who disagree with you on certain decisions. As those fans are clearly misguided if they don't agree with you.

Or maybe i am wrong. Maybe you have some mechanism whereby
(a) "teh fans" all agree on something and
(b) speak with a united voice
How and when does this happen, who would tell the disciplinary what "the fans" decision is?

Your solution in effect means we should abolish the disciplinary. It would be easy enough to replace it with an electronic fans' vote, via internet/social media, which would decide the players' fates. But you entirely fail to understand that that vote would be a long way from unanimous, so WHICH fans would be listened to, and how? The majority? What if it was a London player who injured a Leeds player. Whatever the fairness was, which fans do you think would carry the majority vote? Would it be fair if the RFL "listened to" those fans. or do you think it might be fairer if instead they appointed independent panels with no club bias to independently llok at any given incident. And add a layer of an appeals process if dissatisfied? Oh wait - that appears to be what we already have!

Well you have done a very good job of exaggerating everything I said and seemed to get the wrong end of the stick.
With me saying “we” I would be surprised if you could find anyone who didn’t agree that those two tackles should have had the same punishment.
I also didn’t make any point for fans to be on the panel for disciplinary. It was in general that the RFL don’t listen to fans on any matters that would affect them.

You didn't read the thread about it then? Plenty disagreed. Like on any given incident.


So your comment is just meaningless, then. And you don't propose any particular mechanism by which the RFL could "listen to the fans" in any particular way.

Can you at least give an example of where the RFL has not "listened to the fans"? I mean, I am asking for just one example. The question isn't loaded, I am just interested in what you mean when you say this, because I can't immediately think of any single instance where a unanimous "fans' voice" has spoken to the RFL but been "not listened to".

He will need a good lawyer. For all that I find myself agreeing with him. Never thought the day would come.

That doesn't mean his aggrievance doesn't need addressing, not that he needs educating in the error of his ways.

It's all good slapping a fine on someone, but if they aren't sure what they've done, or don't believe what they did was wrong, they're gonna do it again!

Nobody seems to know how this system works.

@drmarwānK?

I had to look that up to see if it was a parody account, and I'm still not sure!