A good point. We do at least have pride to play for. However, we are supposed to be witnessing the dawn of a new era in which we are going to become a successful club, which means a successful business. Pride doesn't pay the bills.

But it is still a good point.

It's ok saying we have nothing to plays for because we ain't going to finish in top 8 or get relegated but if the players take that attitude then we will get hampered every week like last week and as a fan that ain't good enough

I think we all knew this season would be the 'laying of the foundations' and we wouldn't be making the playoffs or seeing much short term success.

I think I'd be more annoyed/worried about the fine if we didn't have the financial backing that we have now. Some of the comments I've seen on Twitter saying that £10k is a nothing punishment because we have a rich owner make me think that certain people would be perfectly fine with that punishment if we were in the sort of financial position we faced last season.

I'd imagine the aggravating circumstances for the fine would have been (like I said before) the fact we won and that Castleford were attacking our goal line late in the game but the punishment would have probably been mitigated by the situation being unintentional, meaning we weren't docked points. I read that when Canterbury were docked 2 points in the NRL for the same thing, the player was explicitly told not to go on the field before his team mate had come off. My guess would be that we were just told that we could make the interchange.

Where does the 10k go? Seems crazy dishing out big fines when the games on it's ar$e and potentially heading for a return to amateur status when Sky pull out or negotiate a much smaller deal in the future. More quality players inevitability leaving our sport will only weaken our broadcasting appeal.

Personally I would rather take a points deduction.

For what it's worth I think you've got the ty end of the stick!

A few years ago Hornets played Oldham and at half time the Biffos made a substitution. Unfortunately the lad who got subbed was taking a leak at the time and when he came back nobody mentioned it and he ran out with the rest of the team.

Only when Hornets' bench did a count about 3 mins into the second half did it get sorted.

Oldham didn't even get a reprimand!!!

Pugwash.

My mistake. Still underlying point re it wasn't a critical point in the game is correct.

In fairness, Pugwash, knowing both clubs as well as I do, a fine of this proportion would harm either club very seriously and potentially crush either.
But thanks

The thing is everyone is looking at the outcome instead of the actual crime. If we only have a fine, then I assume we have been found guilty of unwittingly playing 14 (for a short time). Had it been intentional then, as I understand it, we would of had a points deduction. So the crime is exactly the same as that of Saints. The period in the game, or outcome of the game therefore, becomes irrelevant. On that basis the fine is draconian.

I think we should look for positives and motivation from each and every experience.
As it took 3 hours of deliberation a lot more information should be forthcoming shortly.Would an appeal,like Castleford did after their homophobic chanting/disorder v Catalans,result in half the fine being taken and half suspended ?
With both our club and Cas appointing new head coaches the task of finishing the highest in the Super League ladder will intensify this year,and most certainly next year.
If there is one precedent I would like Salford to emulate it would be St Helens in 2006.Not only fined for the same offence but by being voted team of the year by the BBC viewers.Think Saints did the treble that year.Best we can do is the double,so no pressure on the players starting Sunday then....
As for the one person in the stadium who saw the extra man on the field....

Does seem to be an excessive penalty - I wonder if perhaps we are paying the price of a few injudicious comments regarding ways around the salary cap?
Have some feathers been ruffled in the RL higher echelons?

I'd like to know, if it was the other way round and Cas had the 14 man when defending their line with a couple of minutes left given their financial crisis would they have been fined the same amount? I honestly don't think they would have been.

Well according to comments from a fair few of their fans they would have been fined and lost the two points

The perceived injustice from rugby league fans (and sports fans in general really) is hilarious sometimes. We've been hit hard for this but some people would seemingly only be happy if we were stripped of all competition points, relegated to the Championship and fined half a million quid.

So from the two incidents in the game:

1) We had 14 players on the field of play for a small proportion of time.
2) Jordan Tansey almost took another players head off with a high tackle and this only got put on report.

We get a £10000 fine and the player is let off for for his offence. Seems the" goal posts have been moved" yet again , against our favour. Will the good Doc appeal against the hefty fine?? Maybe the Myler money will help out ..........

The size of this fine has set an ugly precedence for other SL teams who accidently field 14 players in the future.

Can anyone explain to me why the RFL think the punishment should be a hundred times greater than what Saints got for a similar offense? You really have to shake your head in disbelief at how they came up with this figure considering previous breaches.

It's a joke of a sport run by total amateur dingbats with hidden agenda's, and that's being kind. Hardly surprising the British game can't attract a main sponsor, it's the laughing stock of sport and no company wants to be associated with it for fear of damaging their profile and reputation.

The game needs to bring in some impartial decision makers without ties and prejudice to certain clubs.