If Sam Tomkins is disciplined and punished by the rfl.I wonder if his will fine him too?

i would hope he plays against us on sunday but then again i think he deserves a ban for what he did.aside from being a great talent he is also a cheating,antagonising little turd who would not get the stick he does if he played the game in the spirit it should be played,opposing fans can see what his game is so lets hope the rfl do,i wouldn't hold my breath though.

No chance should Sam be banned, slap on the wrist and a few hundred quid fine should do.

I would be suprised if Lima gets away without a ban for his spear tackle, especially with his previous. Third(?) ban of the season for tackling technique related incidents should see quite a hefty ban levied if the RFL disciplinary committee want to be taken seriously (expect a caution and a warning letter about future conduct then).

I watched the Sky recording of the final and Barrie Mac (a Leeds employee) was commentating. he said that there was nothing wrong in that tackle.

Let's see what the RFL disciplinary have to say when they review game, including Baileys late tackle after the hooter on half time.

There is no doubt that Lima lifts Delaney's legs way past the horizontal and then "drives" (although "drives" in this instance is more than a little over dramatic) him down. He doesn't correct the position of Delaney's body and carry him down which he should have done if it had been an error.

Is that the best you can come up with on Bailey? Little Sam wasn't tackled at the time and was there to be hit. If you want the disciplinary to do Bailey for that "post-hooter" action I'll expect you to be demanding the death penalty for Tommy as a result of his "post hooter" tackle at full-time.

He has apologisedhttp://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME

Fair enough. Raises one question though - when he said 'he said he didn't know anything about it' when asked about it on Saturday what did he mean?

There are a lot of people who don't like Sam, there are many reasons why but it all results in people disliking him.

What he did was wrong, he stuck the Vs up toward the Leeds fans right infront of a camera. Live on BBC One, to a lot of people. Some people will be deeply offended by that. The majority of us on here enjoy a good beer and nothing more than the occasional abusive chant from the stands, but there are many people out there, watching our game at the highest level on a national channel, that don't and could have been offended by that.

People keep bringing up past moments, the most common one being the Lee Briers v Leeds in 2006. But, the RFL shouldn't even consider that. They should take every case as something brand new. Forget about who the player is, what team they play for, just look at their previous history with the Commitee and the offense they are currently there for and punish according to the rules and guidelines.

As a Warrington fan, I'm in two minds about him being banned. I'd love him to play, but would also love a go at the Wigan team without their "goldenboy".

He appologised, that's fair enough. But that was forced by Wigan. That's obvious with the fact that he was fined and punished by his own club before publicly appologising.

The RFL will probably get a fair amount of complaints from RL fans and the BBC, and they need to show they have a backbone.

They should bring him infront of the committee, and ban him. Show to the Rugby League world that the RFL DO have a backbone. Players have to follow THEIR rules and not think they are above the law.

They should tell him they don't care if next week is potentially the league leaders decider, the biggest game in SL the season, or the fact that he is one of Wigans (And dare i say it, one of the sports best players) and hit him with a ban and a fine. Especially because he DENIED doing it. He embarrassed the RFL by doing what he did and he should be FAIRLY punished for it, under the rules set by the RFL. Not just get a slap on the wrists and told not to do it again.

Maybe they tried this...

rlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20590-rat-memory-restored-by-installing-replay-electronics.htmlrl

It means that he was put on the spot and panic set in, that's all. Well done to Wigan for defusing a situation that was in danger of getting out of hand.

Exactly. He probably just didn't realise how obvious it was when he first denied his quote lol.

incident happened in Minute 8. Interview was post match... there's alot goes through a players head in excess of 72 minutes, rather than commenting on it on TV, better to wait to discuss with club management!

Remember, the Wigan Club is very much "No Comment" on press questions.

That's a very charitable way of describing it. Reality is more like:-

- Wigan scored
- He wanted to rub Leeds' fans noses in the Ben Cross (which I don't blame him for)
- He gave them the V, thinking that in the game with the largest TV audience of the season, he wouldn't get caught (which was stupid)
- He did get caught (which was obvious)
- He lied

He may well have panicked but he still lied. The fact that it was after the match is irrelevant. I would have given him a pass if he had come out himself and admitted it later but he didn't.

I don't think we should be banning players for this, either for the gesture or the lie that followed it. However, even the most myopic Wigan fan must now understand why such a talented player is so universally hated.

Still jealousey apparently

Wigan have come out of this very poorly, indeed.

The world and his dog started jumping all over this issue from the moment it happened.
It's been "hyped-up" out of all proportions ever since.
It's been mentioned on national sports reports, and covered in the printed media.
All this could have been nipped in the bud, a couple of hours after the game, or first thing Sunday morning, when Wigan finished celebrating.

We all know Tomkins was (morally) in the wrong (as I said previously, he's a RL player, not exactly known for his brain). Wigan should have said to him "listen sunshine, you've made a bit of a pratt of yourself, go and apologise, and everyone will quickly forget about it". Instead, they let it fester for 48 hours, which has cooked up more paranoia throughout the game.
No need for Wigan to go inside their "shell", and have a debate about it, with a "shall we, shall we not" attitude, with regards a statement. We all know what happened.

Poor effort all round.

This should have been dealt with a lot sooner.