Admittedly the RFL are in a position of 'duty of care' and no doubt are concerned about legal action regarding head injuries and older/retired players,
but the current regime and penalties for ( what constitutes) foul play does seem ludicrous. Whether intentional or not it seems to shout ' look at how seriously we are taking our responsibilities ' rather than focusing on the job in hand. Then there is the situation with appeals. Initially they seem to have decided that they would not allow their decisions to be questioned (frivolous appeal), now it looks as though appeals are to be allowed again. Finally the imbalance between objectionable language and play likely to cause serious injury needs looking at.

Somebody needs to get a grip, at the moment it looks as though Liz Truss is running the committee.

The success rate of appeals looks imbalanced but if you put the number of bans against the number of appeals against successful appeals then maybe not quite so much (I haven’t done the calculation just guessing).
How the punishment for language used can be so disproportionate to physical injury (especially intentional actions) definitely needs reviewing. In criminal law it is the reverse.

Yeah but Phil Veivers is on the board and he no doubt made sure McGuire was slapped with a 19 game ban, placed in shackles and returned to Australia in order to stop our 8 game winning streak and sure the 5 peat remains on track. Clearly still not forgiven Dessie for knocking him out with his trademark headbutt in the cup in 1989 (or thereabouts). Massive conspiracy.

That is skewed by a lot of clubs just taking the bans for a while, no matter how daft they were. I think there are a few clubs now that are so sick of the whole mess that they'll appeal everything now as they have absolutely no respect for the panel anymore. It's going to be interesting to see how the MRP behave over the next few weeks. Are they going to dig their heels in and have more bumper weeks, or take the frustration on board and calm it down till the end of the season?

The language issue is all about PR. They feel they've got to be seen to be inclusive, so long bans for spicy language are an easy tick in a box.

Salford went down the St Helens route of appealing the failed appeal but that’s failed aswell Watkins still banned.

Another farcical decision. It's technically a penalty, but absolutely no referee is even considering sending him off for that. So why are we banning him for it, despite him having a good disciplinary record?

Because Cullen wants us to win, well that’s what most of your colleagues over on Redvee seem to think.

Frivolous challenge not a thing anymore then.

The match review panel should be abolished and the only time a incident gets referred to disciplinary is when the referee or match commissioner... (and the bunker if that comes in as rumored for 2024) these are the only 3 people who can refer it to a disciplinary committee. Made up of rhe following.
1 person from the rfl.
The head of referring.
A ex player.
A ex coach.
A legal expert.
5 person panel. Simple majority vote passes.

Stop sanitising the game. It's like the match review panel will analyse every single match frame by frame. And instead of watching the game and watch the game they've played in or been around all there lives. (And probably played in more hard hitting matches themselves. *cough* Cullen new years day against Wigan. *cough*) they are looking for minor stupid indiscretions that probably everyone but them have seen. And the player in question probably didn't realise they had done.
Simplify the disciplinary procedure. Something like I suggested and we may start to get somewhere disciplinary wise.

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/62 ... view-panel

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/62 ... view-panel

No Saints players banned we need to appeal

Surprised that Brad Singleton has a 1 match penalty notice but Nicholson just has a fine.
They looked pretty similar to me.
I managed to watch most of the Saints v Leigh game and it was an intense game with some tough defence. Credit to both teams that they can play to that intensity and stay the right side of the disciplinary line.

The summary says no ban for Nicholson, but the notes at the top of page 22 suggest a 1 game ban?

Following the latest round of Betfred Super League, Betfred League One & Academy fixtures, the Match Review Panel have issued the following sanctions:

Joe Wardle (Leigh Leopards) - Grade B Dangerous Contact - £250 Fine
Tom Amone (Leigh Leopards) - Grade B Raising knee in Tackle - £250 Fine
Renouf Atoni (Wakefield Trinity) - Grade C Dangerous Contact - 1 Match Penalty Notice
Arthur Romano (Catalans Dragons) - Grade B Other Contrary Behaviour - £250 Fine
Abbas Miski (Wigan Warriors) - Grade A Dangerous Contact - Not Applicable
David Fusitu'a (Leeds Rhinos) - Grade A Dangerous Contact - £250 Fine
Sam Walters (Leeds Rhinos) - Grade B Dangerous Contact - 1 Match Penalty Notice
Luke Yates (Huddersfield Giants) - Grade B Dangerous Contact - 1 Match Penalty Notice
Jack Ashworth (Huddersfield Giants) - Grade C Dangerous Contact - 1 Match Penalty Notice
Brad Singleton (Salford Red Devils) - Grade B High Tackle - 1 Match Penalty Notice
Matty Nicholson (Warrington Wolves) - Grade B High Tackle - £250 Fine
Thomas Mikaele (Warrington Wolves) - Grade B High Tackle - £250 Fine
Harrison Gilmore (Leeds Rhinos Academy) - Grade C High Tackle - 1 Match Penalty Notice
Will Groves (Castleford Tigers Academy) - Grade B Other Contrary Behaviour - £25 Fine
The following players have received a caution:

Edwin Ipape (Leigh Leopards) - Dangerous Contact
Will Pryce (Huddersfield Giants) - Other Contrary Behaviour

Chances are singleton has had a previous charge or already had a ban for similar this year

Salford's appeal is in. One senses they're not too impressed again. It feels like the MRP are deliberately baiting them now. Nothing more than a penalty that one.