I sent an email to the RFL and this is my response!

Quote: Warrington_Wolves_RLFC "My 1st email
Dear Sirs,
I cannot understand the RFL disciplinary committee’ recent decision to give Keiron Cunningham just a caution for striking an opponent and breaking his eye socket. Surely under the RFL rules this player should have been given the appropriate sentence as set out below. In my view he should have been sentenced between grade A and C. Firstly at the least he lashed out at an opponent (A-B) Failing that your decision is based on the fact that the player accidentally made contact with the players eye socket. Surely this comes into the category of being ‘Reckless’ a reasonable person would be able to consciously recognise that aiming a strike to the head of an opponent runs the risk of making contact with the eyes, nose, cheekbone, jaw or mouth. However I think the strike was intentional.
Looking at the guidelines and evidence in my view the player should have been charged with a category C offence.
Details of Charge / Reason for NF Player intentionally has a jab at the Wakefield player and as such is guilty of misconduct; however the Panel are giving him the benefit of the doubt that contact with the eye is accidental and as such consider that it is appropriate to deal with this matter by way of a caution

So Mr Cunningham didn’t know that Stosic had eye sockets on his face????

2.5 LAWS OF THE GAME
The Laws of the Game On Field Misconduct offences are15.1(a) Trips, kicks or strikes another player
Strikes – punching
A-B
Reaction to opponent – lashing out

Strikes
B-C
Strikes with hand, arm or shoulder – reckless

Sorry for the rant but I just felt the decision to just issue a formal caution is unjustified and will certainly pave the way for more players to strike with the ball carrying arm.

RFL's response
Thank you for your recent email,

Keiron Cunningham was issued with a formal caution

I cannot believe their rationale in allowing the fat git to get away with this cowardly attack... '"Accidental" my ar$e!

Going forward, it sets a very dangerous precedent.