https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... lves-side/

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... lves-side/

No appeals this week.

It would be interesting if someone added the number of games players have been banned for for both clubs as a comparison so far this season. I think it may go in St Helens favour with McGuire's 7 games.

Quote: Saddened! "He's not though is he. This latest one he put an arm out and caught him, but there was no swinging arm or real force in it. It's not a grade D incident. The other stuff he's been up before the committee for, he's largely been completely innocent of. He's got two referrals and yellow cards for 'high' tackles that were in the middle of the chest for example. You mock the stance that Saints fans feel we're hard done to, but you can't sensibly argue with the evidence of that. Lees challenge wasn't the worst high shot in the game, Wright's on Ritson was, no charge. 'But it was off the ball Gov!' you all cry, well what about the Catalans player who got off completely with clobbering the Cas player around the head off the ball? That was significantly worse than what Lees did and he plays this weekend. The late hit from Sironen? What a grub, what a monster. There were FOUR worse ones that that in the Saints v Salford game alone. Makinson for us (Which they picked up), plus Sneyd on Lomax (which was awful) and Croft on Lomax, which they didn't. Croft on Lomax is an interesting one. He knocks him to the ground after he passes to Sironen for his try. Contact is high, with the shoulder, there's no wrap and the passer is left flat on the floor. No charge, no ban, nothing on his record. Sironen wasn't late, wasn't high, wrapped his arms and took his opponent to ground safely. Sironen gets banned. There are examples like this every single time a Saints player is banned. Lomax cops them every single week and there is never anything for them. I appreciate it's fun for you because we're getting these, but it's not hard to see that there's a big difference in how we're treated by the MRP than any other club. They tried to get Lees banned for longer too by removing the penalty notice, meaning his ban could be for more than 2-3 games the grade suggests, which is unbelievable. Luckily the independent tribunal laughed at that and agreed with Saints and overturned it, giving him the lowest ban possible, but we've no doubt made things worse by doing that.'" Here you go mate. Maybe you need to send a detailed email to your coach outlining why he's wrong and how your players are being unfairly picked on... https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-le ... s-30057459

Quote: Saddened! "He's not though is he. This latest one he put an arm out and caught him, but there was no swinging arm or real force in it. It's not a grade D incident. The other stuff he's been up before the committee for, he's largely been completely innocent of. He's got two referrals and yellow cards for 'high' tackles that were in the middle of the chest for example. You mock the stance that Saints fans feel we're hard done to, but you can't sensibly argue with the evidence of that. Lees challenge wasn't the worst high shot in the game, Wright's on Ritson was, no charge. 'But it was off the ball Gov!' you all cry, well what about the Catalans player who got off completely with clobbering the Cas player around the head off the ball? That was significantly worse than what Lees did and he plays this weekend. The late hit from Sironen? What a grub, what a monster. There were FOUR worse ones that that in the Saints v Salford game alone. Makinson for us (Which they picked up), plus Sneyd on Lomax (which was awful) and Croft on Lomax, which they didn't. Croft on Lomax is an interesting one. He knocks him to the ground after he passes to Sironen for his try. Contact is high, with the shoulder, there's no wrap and the passer is left flat on the floor. No charge, no ban, nothing on his record. Sironen wasn't late, wasn't high, wrapped his arms and took his opponent to ground safely. Sironen gets banned. There are examples like this every single time a Saints player is banned. Lomax cops them every single week and there is never anything for them. I appreciate it's fun for you because we're getting these, but it's not hard to see that there's a big difference in how we're treated by the MRP than any other club. They tried to get Lees banned for longer too by removing the penalty notice, meaning his ban could be for more than 2-3 games the grade suggests, which is unbelievable. Luckily the independent tribunal laughed at that and agreed with Saints and overturned it, giving him the lowest ban possible, but we've no doubt made things worse by doing that.'" Here you go mate. Maybe you need to send a detailed email to your coach outlining why he's wrong and how your players are being unfairly picked on... https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-le ... s-30057459

If your discipline needs improving then that is the root cause of you being "treated differently" as you put it. Cause and effect. I'd say "treated appropriately" would be the correct term. Stop the indiscretions, stop the bans. It's quite a simple concept when you think about it. Even your own fans, for the most part, are starting to see it. Not yourself, of course, but then a persecution complex will have that effect. Maybe take off the Redvee glasses once in a while. The view is quite illuminating.

Corrected your post for you mate.

Talking of drawing a line under things could we please use this thread for This Week's Disciplinary discussion NOT the Saints Conspiracy theory which is becoming tiresome.

Let's keep it relevant and fresh and in the real world

Isn't the Knowles ban this week?

It may well be and as a topic for discussion on this thread that's fine and as discussed at length Saints seem to be copping a lot of bans and fines so they may be generating a lot of traffic.

But the conspiracy angle and laughing at redvee and saddened though they deserve most of it has begun to lose its appeal if you pardon the pun

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/61 ... view-panel

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/61 ... view-panel

No surprise with this week’s disciplinary, can’t have magic weekend ruined for the TV.

Am I going dafter in old age..why does it say in the minutes josh McGuire club and shirt number Warrington and 13 but match Catalans v Wakefield

Oh no. What has he said now?

What the hell is this about? Some sort of huge gum shield required. https://www.totalrl.com/warrington-wolv ... -language/

What the hell is this about? Some sort of huge gum shield required. https://www.totalrl.com/warrington-wolv ... -language/

If this is discriminatory language again, he must be close to being dismissed.