Quite right Alan. Also Gigot got a 2 year ban for "inappropriate behaviour" towards an anti-doping officer. So because he didn't fail a drugs test, it was reduced to 3 months. Correct me if i'm wrong here, but he got a 2 year ban for "inappropriate behaviour" towards an anti-doping officer. , nothing to do with any outcome of a drugs test. So when the test was clear, it was, Oh ok we'll take 21 months off that ban now. Unbelievable.

The nine game ban is excessive, to say the least, re Jamie. I am sick and tired of reading the punishments given out to other SL players relative to players such as Jamie, Gaz Hock and Ben Westwood. All three are public enemy number 1 in the eyes of the RFL Disciplinary. They probably have posters up of them on their walls at Red Hall like those 'Wanted Dead or Alive' western ones. Last week Joe Burgess deliberately grabbed Ashton Sims hair in the middle of a melee. It wasn't even cited on this weeks hearings. Why? Because he is a current England international who plays for a high profile SL club. The same goes for Jon Bateman in the same game last week striking out in the middle of a melee. Once again nothing to be seen or done at the Disciplinary re this. Sean O'Loughlin gets similar favourable treatment. In fact Sean should take up refereeing when he retires, but then again maybe not, because after all he referees the game enough as a player during a game with his regular contesting of decisions on the field. There is clear pattern of thinking re the Disciplinary when it comes to punishing players for offences in general. The pattern is that certain high profile players will be treated more favourably, especially if they are current England internationals. Someone on this message board recently referred to the arch-tripper extraordinaire Richie Myler who never seems to receive a ban despite being a repeat offender for this offence. Richie is a current England international. Chris Hill in the Challenge Cup game against Widnes a few weeks ago deliberately raises his elbow towards the head of a Widnes player. Ok, there was no contact but the intent was there all the same. The result? You guessed it-nothing at the Disciplinary. Oh, and Chris is a current England international in case anyone needed reminding. Now taking this little snapshot of incidents and people and replacing there names with Jamie, Gaz or Ben, I would confidently say that the outcomes re appearances at the Disciplinary would be very different.
There is a clear pattern of multi-tier punishments given out to players by the RFL Disciplinary based on who you are and if you play for a high profile SL club and are also a current England international.
This season Jamie has not committed any bad, dirty tackles that I can remember, certainly not on a par with Adam Higson's rash challenge at Magic Weekend. He has been cited at every opportunity for silly stuff. Against Leeds in round 2 he knocked the ball out of a Leeds players hand to stop them taking a quick restart, and gets a yellow card and a ban. Anthony Gelling during the Leigh v Wigan game at the DW kicked a ball back onto the field of play from off the field of play knowing that by doing so that two balls would be in play, and knowing full well that the Ref would have to stop play to remove one of them. Leigh were attacking 20 metres out from the Wigan line at the time, so Wigan got an extra bit of rest. It was a professional foul that resulted in no punishment at all. Jamie shoved Flanagan of Salford in the back earlier this season, and in another game tripped a Wigan player (Burgess?) in the recent game at Leigh. There was one poor tackle he did this season, similar to a cannonball type tackle, nothing happened on the pitch re this and there was no injury to the tackled player, but then he gets cited again retrospectively and banned at the Disciplinary. Some of this was silly but hardly serious compared to a head tackle, grapple tackle or 'chicken wing' tackle. Last season Sean O'Loughlin received a one match ban for the head tackle that ended the season of the Wakefield player.
It's about time that the RFL were more consistent in their punishment of like for like offences for all players with no exceptions.
There simply should be an offence, a punishment grading, and a punishment and this should apply to all.
Generally speaking Championship players are more likely to be banned for like for like offences compared to SL players, who in many cases cop a fine. This is wrong and done probably because SL clubs are richer, and vice versa re Championship clubs.
I hope the club sticks by Jamie and appeals this excessive punishment, but at the same time I hope Jamie quickly learns to realise that like certain other players he is a marked man with the RFL. He needs to focus on his rugby and stay away from getting drawn into unnecessary incidents.

Can we think of anyone else who committed 'inapppropriate behaviour towards an anti-doping officer', got a two-year ban, and was very nearly jailed for 'virtual assault? He appealed, but his two year ban was upheld, despite not having failed a drug test.

Did he actually take the test though ??

Supposed to have offered to, when the police arrived. But I think the Drugs Agency person refused to do it!

Yes Alan, S B.

Woe is me! The whole world and especially the RFL are against Leigh. Superficially many incidents appear similar but in fact are not. There are many mistakes by Referees, Linesmen and even members of the disciplinary panel but to suggest that any of them deliberately target one team is laughable. If you sign players with a poor disciplinary record you may expect problems in that area.

Maybe not targeted, but we're on the wrong end of inconsistencies.

The Acton trip ban vs Myler's record is a case in point. Myler may not have had a poor disciplinary record. But it'd be a lot worse if it wasn't deemed appropriate to give him 7 warnings before issuing a grade A charge.

so some people on here still think he got what he deserved,ben flower launches an attack to what appears an unconscious player,that results in the player leaving the pitch and is forced to retire eight games later with recurring concusion issues,and cops an 8 game ban.acton throws no punches,no high shot,or late shot.injures the player to such an extent,that he is out of the game for a full 10 minutes,he then returns to the game to assault another player and gain a 1 match ban.i am not actons biggest fan,but to be judged for something that did not happen/could have happened is a farce.would this happen in a real court ???.

Don't forget, Flower knocked him out in the first place as well!

5 or 6 was my expectation so I do agree 9 seems harsh. However, I also think it's best to think about the possible outcry if it was one of our players was on the floor like Bird and an opposition player had done what Jamie did to them? Would we all not have been up in arms asking for them to be banned and posting in a thread about how our own players health had been exposed to a possible brain/neck injury.You have to see both sides and walk in the other mans shoes so to speak.

If your disciplinary record is poor you will get hit with longer bans than someone with a better disciplinary record who has committed the same offence. Disciplinary records are always taken into when sentencing a player. Therefore you can not compare like for like. Acton has been to Red Hall 11 times in 2 years and is not learning from his mistakes.

It reminds me of the problems Alan Rathbone had with the judiciary many moons ago, and we stuck by him didn't we?

I suppose its weighing up the pros and cons. Does what a player gives when he is playing outweigh the disadvantages of playing with 12 men from time to time and the matches lost to suspension.