He gets pulled to ground and takes a right pounding why he's down there.Drags himself up and commits the Grade D.There is a misinterpretation in this thread though regarding the silly theatrics.Acton is actually telling him he can only hit someone when they are down,hence the hands.

Swinton got away with that big time,courtesy of the camera angle.

I am Jamie Acton's biggest fan and have said on here a couple of times that I believe he can be as good a player as he wants to be. Unfortunately the reputation he now has to live down is one that it is very easy to get him wound up to the point where the red mist descends - with the obvious consequences. If Championship opposition can easily trigger this reaction then how much easier will it be for higher grade opponents?

Reference has been made on this thread to our model pro's - Dayne and Fui. Jamie does have a great deal to learn from these guys if his career is not to be blighted by a bad disciplinary reputation. He has the ability to be remembered as a great player, quite apart from the fact that he stands to receive far greater rewards in all respects if he can control his reactions.

It is now almost forgotten, but I understand Fui went through a catalogue of serious disciplinary issues as a result of on field offences in his early career. Fui got through it to become a legend in the sport - there is no better role model for Jamie to follow.

I totally agree with Snowy and Mr PTB. In fact, I said almost the same last season about Acton especially. He's young and has plenty time to get his discipline sorted. With Hock, though, I am afraid he'll never shake off his rep'. And neither does it seem like he really wants to.

In all this there is no talk of how all this started. I have watched the footage enough to give me a headache and for me AJ is the one who started to throw the punches. I can't make out what made him do it. Maybe he needs to have a talking to and have a word with himself as two of his team mates now have considerable bans.

The only major problem we have had this year to date is v Swinton. The only problem Bradford have had this year was v Swinton. Enough said.

Our game v Bradford at the bash was played hard and fair with nothing of any note for the ref to deal with.

I'm sure Higson has had many a talking too,not the first time is it! Acton not helping himself with the short fuse but not being helped by others with even shorter fuses.
Don't bother winding the forwards up,just go for the winger and the rest will follow naturally.

i wonder if this means that the game can now be put on LCTV as we pay for it i find it a little irritating that we should be censored in what games we are allowed to see and what somebody deems we are not allowed to see.
The hearing is finished whats done is done fair or unfair lets see the game

Higsons oppo had given him a dig a few minutes earlier and then did so again, no reaction again from the tool with the whistle so he must have thought fekk it.

Littler made direct contact with the head when Pownall scored - nothing done. Elbows high shots and niggle galore - nothing done. I have every confidence that with competence in the middle we don't have a problem, maybe we should take a leaf out of soccer and start rolling around like we've been shot

Fully understand the frustration all round whether it be the competence of officials, opposition tactics, who is to blame within our own squad or whether we have been dealt with fairly by the RFL Disciplinary system.

Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world and need to take responsibility for our 'red mist actions' - like channeling the aggression into an impact on the score board rather than tarnishing the reputation of the club and having important members of the squad missing for weeks on end.

It is even more important when we are coming up to the most crucial part of the season and for that matter the club's recent history. We shall need everyone available and more importantly fully match fit, to give ourselves even a 'fighting chance' (please excuse the pun).

RL's decisions, enough said !

That isn't exactly a massive disagreement with the inference of my statement that I thought it might have been

I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories and slagging off the disciplinary panel but this really is an odd decision with Acton & Fleming. Fleming guilty of fighting twice, once being the instigator and once running in, and striking with the elbow gets a 2 match ban, Acton is guilty of fighting once and striking with the knees gets a 7 match ban. If both those players got 2 games I'd be pleased to get Jamie back but think they got off very lightly, if both got 7 I'd think it very harsh but probably fair enough as this isn't what we want in our sport, but to give one player 2 and one player 7 is just utterly farcical. It is almost as if a completely different set of people made the decision using completely different editions of the sentencing guidelines.

And there lies the problem with inconsistent disciplinary panel decisions.
Match review panel isn't fit for purpose, folk who dish the games/fines out also not fit to run a bath.
Trouble is clubs just laugh at other clubs when they boo about a bad/unfair decision but then when it happens to your club it hurts.
Something needs to be done but the clubs that complain year after year just keep on complaining without getting full support of all clubs for a fair and just system.
We don't want an advantage, just consistency imo.

Peter

Welcome back and a very good post Peter