Because you appealed. Had you had accepted your punishment as other sides did it wouldn't have been an issue. Hence you can't compare the 2. Nor can people day this now sets a precedent. It only sets a precedent to clubs who appeal and that appeal is then rejected.

Contrary to popular belief, "bully boys" Peel don't own every scrap of land IN Salford, you weren't forced to move to Barton surely? Yes most stadia are delivered by partnerships based on mutual benefits, a bit of planning gain here if you like for a subsidised venture there. This might involve a supermarket, or the stadia might unlock another aspect of commercial development nearby along the banks of the Ship Canal if you like, it has to be paid for after all and you hadn't got the proverbial pot?

Your club, sorry old regime, could have gone elsewhere with your '8,000 fans' after all it was the only thing that you were bringing to the party? Oh hang on a minute you haven't got 8,000 fans, but, never mind eh that was the old regime. Given time, when you are successful, they will come in droves don't worry seems to be the new message from the new regime.

Well it might just take a bit longer than you think and whilst I wish you well on your 'rollercoaster, let's write this season off journey', it seems a bit rich having a go at other clubs who haven't got an investor, or a City Council so easily duped, so pat yourself on your own head for now

Good to see Uncle 'I wish Salford all the best despite regularly making negative posts about them' Rico back on the forum.

I was at the game but I did not notice the 14 players on the field at the time;nor did the officials ( ref and touch judges ) or the Sky commentary team.Immediately after the game I spoke with the one person in the stadium who did make the observation.
There is nothing on the SCR website or in the RFL release - or other media outlets - which inform me about...
1) Which player entered the field to make the 14 - Before it was apparently Jordan James,now it is apparently Vic Mauro.The player who should have left the field,I think it has been agreed,was Darrell Griffin.
2) Is there an individual at fault or is there more than one person to blame ? If so who are those people ?
3) What alteration to the processes and procedures have now been taken to prevent a reoccurrence ?
4) As it appears SCR appealed against the fine ie.the amount of the fine,how can the RFL not just increase the fine if they consider it wrong to appeal ? Is their a soccer club/player who has appealed against a ban for a number of games had his club docked points or fined ? It should only be a relevant increase to what the original sanction was.
Had SCR been docked 1 point and then appealed and lost,the further increased penalty could then,justifiably,be increased to more than one point.
The RFL just make it up as they go along and as they offer no explanation to the mugs who pay to watch the sport then it does not surprise me in the least that people find alternative ways to spend their time and their money.

The precedent is set.Off course it is.That was set at 10K fine for the offence.The fact that Salford appealed gave the RFL the chance to vary the original punishment.So for any club committing a similar offence it has to be a 10k fine but if you appeal it becomes 5k and the loss of points.

The more worrying aspect of all this is the total shambolic way the RFL has handled the whole situation.

From Salfords point of view why was there such a discrepancy in punishments between two similar offences,the other being the £100 fine handed to Saints.To hand out one of the largest fines ever dished out just smacks of victimisation to many Salford fans.Where was the RFL appointed official in all of this who obviously made a mess of things on the side lines.
By imposing such a huge fine the RFL were for all intents and purposes making an appeal inevitable especially when the Saints fine was factored into things.An appeal was made out a sense of fairness.Salford accepted they had broke the rules albeit unintentionally and would have accepted their punishment without a word if it had been seen to be a fair and just one.A 10K fine was none of those things.

From the Cas perspective you surely must be more concerned with why were the points not awarded to you once they were deducted from Salford.Again a precedent is being set that in years to come may come back to haunt the RFL in a big way.What happens when the new layout of the SL system is implemented.
Situations could arise where the clubs could say,Throw on a 14th man,we can take the 10K fine but we wont lose the points unless we appeal.Those points could be the difference between relegation or promotion.
Totally ridiculous situation the RFL has now created.

And all this confusion created by an organisation that gave away the TV rights to one of the highest rated sports in the UK,for next to nothing and then cant even find a Main Sponsor for SL after the whole Stobbart fiasco.Thats money lost that should have been going to our clubs.
Thats our wonderful RFL in a nutshell for you.Incompetent.

Happy to be here again, it's hard to stay away as you guys are always making the news these days, just the way you like it.

I was enjoying reading about the opinions on the fine/appeal etc when one of your 'own' had the temerity to suggest that the RFL should start looking closely at those clubs that had failed to deliver on their new grounds' promises, a bit of a quantum leap that I just couldn't resist responding to

the fine has gone up by 5000 plus 2 points it pays to keep stum and not cheat

Oh dear. We must help these Widnes people.

The fine was £10k and it is now £5k which means - at a stroke the Doctor has saved £5k with his appeal. 3 x One Way Tickets to Australia for Goldie & the Chuckle Brothers would cost about £3k so seems a good deal for the club.

I know! What is it with these Widnes people? It raises a "what came first" type question: Is the chemical industry the cause of mutants like the capital letter deprived "year of the viking", or did the chemical industry move to the Widnes area because the mutants were already there? I genuinely don't know the answer to this.

On the points deduction: Meh. This season is about performances (and the lack of) for us, and seeing young players coming through. The points are irrelevant.

Does this really matter, you can't blame Salford for lodging an appeal as it is a given right to do so.
Ok so the RL have slapped them on the wrists and "punished " them for their mistake. The two points deduction is in itself pathetic since due to their current league position and season so far does absolutely nothing, fair enough if this Super league actually had a meaning to it when in the lower half then fair enough it can then be seen to be a punishment as it is it just seems a total waste of time for those concerned.
I think most fans would agree that if the same had happened to their club you would want to see the officials of that club look to get a review of the case by appeal.

Time to move on and forget about it just as the clubs who bent the salary cap rules have.

A fair post, Marshy.