I agree DSM. Unacceptable language should be punished but how it is considered worse than physical assaults (including those with attacks on genitalia) seems disproportionate. Having said all that, Maguire was given a chance and blew it. The fact that it involved the same player suggests stupidity of the highest order..at best.

I suspect the club will have to wait on the result of an appeal, if that's what Mcguire is planning on doing.

I'm certainly not condoning McGuire's behaviour, but if I was a RL player now and someone got in my face on the pitch, as Charnley often does with opponents, then rather than bicker childishly with them, I'd simply give it 5 minutes and then kneecap him and hopefully finish his career - I'd only be looking at a 2 or 3 game ban max....

It would be interesting to see the minutes of the disciplinary hearing, to know the process by which this case was judged. If no officials heard anything (which is presumably the case, as no action was taken on the field), then were they going purely on the evidence of an opposition player or players? If so, that sets a precedent that could very easily be manipulated in future.

The hearing is chaired by a judge. They understand due process and all that.

I'm sure they do. My point is, does that 'due process' include relying on and accepting evidence that can't be viewed as impartial?

For all we know one of our own players could’ve said they heard it, someone who knows josh personally and thought that isn’t right? that would surely be the tipping point in the evidence required to find him guilty?

I think a system chaired by a judge has to be trusted.

Just being curious and playing devils advocate here,but did you say the same last year when Knowles won his appeal using the same process ?

I didn't comment on it, but yes I would have.

Well that's fair enough then. I'm not sure what to make about the Mcguire case, on one hand there seems to be very little actual evidence to back it up and it seems to be a case of one person's word against his and IF he is found guilty on that basis then it opens up a whole can of worms. On the other hand IF it is true what he said and about who it was said about then he needs the book throwing at him. I accept sledging goes on in the game,it always has,but you just don't go past a certain point with it.

The ref heard McGuire last time, but no official heard anything this time. So this stems from Charnley just saying McGuire said something and being put on report.
But there must be more to it than that, or any player could say someone said somthing and get them banned. So i can't see this ban just being because a player claimed he said something.

It's embarrassing for us to try to question the process or the severity of the offence. It's a dark day for our club and one we need to seize before it sullies our strong reputation as an inclusive community club.

Just to add…

Not condoning McGuire at all, he is bang out of order. However, I thought what happened on the pitch stayed on the pitch. There must be lots done and said in every single game whilst trying to wind the opposition up. Is Charnley the biggest snake of them all for snitching not once but twice? Hasn’t he got an axe to grind with Warrington and hasn’t he used this situation to heap trouble on his former club and team?

Also, there were rumours that another Warrington player had given McGuire the full sp on Charnley’s kid. If this is true shouldn’t this other player also be reprimanded for loading the gun?

I also agree that the punishment does seem to outweigh the crime here. Some of the physical stuff is getting away lightly by comparison.

It’s a man’s game currently played by men acting like kids. The game is going down the pan.

What do the minutes say? I’m on holiday and haven’t had the chance to sit down and try to find therm. TIA.

Quite

No minutes as far as I can see.

One of the most disappointing things is that McGuire seems to have lied about the first offence. He was quoted as saying (not verbatim) 'I said something bad but I didn't say THAT'.

Someone mentioned to me that whilst at Currie's testimonial dinner at Burtonwood that he stated that he was unaware that the slur he used was so frowned upon in this country when it isn't in Australia.

So his earlier denial doesn't hold water. Not good.

I think it's embarrassing for the sport, and society in general, that we consider name calling as more of a hanging offence than if you physically injure someone, potentially finishing their career.

There was a huge moan last year that the bans for players were excessive - they’ve rectified this and reduced the sanctions of each grading.
We need to wait for the minutes to be released, but he has now been twice found guilty of using language that has no place in society, never mind from somebody representing our town and our sport on a national stage. I expect a very good explanation as to why his bags haven’t already been packed, the silence from the club on this is deafening.

I would think the club have to follow a legal process here. The player may well wish to appeal, which may delay things if it is something we have to wait for before we are allowed to terminate any contract due to behaviour. (If that is indeed on the cards).

I'm sure there will be various meetings at the club today and a statement will come.

its called due process, they had to go through the disciplinary procedure, to see what happens there, as he may have been denying it again. they can't just click their fingers and say begone, like in most walks of life. its not like in the movies.

If McGuire is or isn't guilty as charged & there is mischief coming from the opposition, i would think the whole episode has put a cloud over our team & its performances on the field. We have a situation where the players have loyalties to McGuire as a current team member & also to past teammates at Leigh ,some they have played alongside since childhood. Hopefully,a line can be drawn under the "incident" quickly & the Wire can concentrate on playing rugby again.

I don't think any Wire fan (or official) would defend him if irrefutable proof came to light that he said what is reported. We all agree it has no place iife, society or the sport.

What doesn't quite sit well with me is that he has been disciplined on, it would appear, subjective, unconfirmed allegations from an opposition player.

If such allegations were made against me, I'd expect to see tangible evidence and if none was forthcoming I'd expect the charges to be dismissed.

So, either the RFL aren't operating with total transparency, or they are desperate to be seen to be doing the right thing even if there is no evidence.

The solution is simple - release the details of the charge, supporting evidence and minutes.

Absolutely - but what we have at the moment is a heap of negative press stories and no response from the club.
If I were Wire I’d be putting out an interim statement.