As much as I want to believe there is no bias, it is getting harder and harder to believe it with the evidence presented.

MATE......I have trawled through a few "verdicts" and we always get the top end. Seriously, if Clubb is supposed to have tried to hurt the lad, then throw the book at him, but if it was unintentional, the warn him. Just a shame we didn't make the CC semis.......he would have only got 1 week then
The diciplinary system needs a total overhaul. I honestly can't see what the panel isn't made up of referees TBH. Surely, of all the people connected with the game, they are best qualified to pass judgement than:
J Spencer R Bridge D Campbell who were the panel last night. There is no background info on these faceless idiots and they would seem to be a Gin quaffing, Jag driving, Golf Club membered group of old farts!

ex officials......that's the point.
The game has moved forward, is faster and the players are fitter than they were....even compared to 5 years ago and as such, different to what the panel were used to in their day.
Also, regardless of their past experience, the decision on Clubb when compared to the Cunningham one point to there being something rotten....and it ain't in Denmark either!
I also believe that Clubby got the ban because the guy he tackled is half his size. As Big Mac said, he got the timing wrong, nothing more nothing less. It's not Clubby's fault the little runt makes Rob Burrow look tall.

That was my first thought. With all our first choice centres & second rows available it doesn't hit us too hard in terms of the team we'll have out for the two Bradford games, but we must have copped more match suspensions than any other SL team over the past two seawsons, yet we seem to concede fewer penalties than anyone else during the matches. It doesn't add up.

Yes I think the statistics speak for themselves (even after giving a child a whistle last week) we do offend less and are punished more harshly with the red and the suspensions.

Club Penalties/Yellow Cards/Red Cards

1 Leeds 180/3/0
2 Catalans 176/1/0
3 Huddersfield 176/2/0
4 Celtic Crusaders 160/2/0
5 Salford 160/3/0
6 Castleford 156/2/0
7 Bradford 154/1/0
8 Wakefield 151/1/0
9 Wigan 143/4/0
10 Warrington 135/1/0
11 St Helens 130/0/0
12 Hull Kingston Rovers 128/1/0
13 Harlequins 126/0/1
14 Hull 106/1/0

As soon as Clubby was up for the disciplinary, I think we all knew that this would happen. Why do the same clubs get pinged and the same ones get away with murder.

Not Russ Bridge who played for Fulham RL in the eighties I hope!

Hopefully Mac will use this injustice to fire up the Lads on Sunday.

So who polices the police? Why do officials make good Judges? Are all magistrates ex policemen? No of course not they are respected members of the community who are deemed to see things from an impartial viewpoint.

Injustice? So you think it's OK to slam a young kid's head with considerable force into the ground do you? Head trauma is serious, and the potential for serious injury in a tackle which involves force to the head is great. In fact one of Saints' youngsters Jonny Lomax suffered a serious head injury at 14 as a result of playing rugby. It left him unconcious, vomiting and he had to undergo hours of open skull surgery to relieve the pressure building up on his brain, and he had to take a year out from playing rugby. It's a credit to Jonny that he's still playing, and that he's up there as one of the most promising young talents in the game today, but it just goes to show how serious a collision can be if it involves the head.

Shame you had nowt to say about a certain hooker punching someone so had they broke his eye socket...

Legless!!!

you miss the point! nobody here is saying that if an offence occurs, especially a head shot, then it should be dealt with
Read the threads! its about parity across the board with punishment of offences when they go up to the panel
Cunningham blatently punches a bloke in the face! its ON TV and was replayed several times
Deemed to be accidental by the board

1 rule for 1 team 1 rule for another
There are players out there that are known as nasty players and for some reason they get away with it

Again not defending any player who targets the head
But lets have a level field from the discip board if the offence was that bad why did he stay on the field?

What is this hang up people have with Cunningham at present? Are you all bored with Pryce or something? Sheesh. The green eyed monster does indeed exist!

It wasn't deemed to be accidental. Read the ruling. It was deemed to be reckless, but the RFL gave Cunningham [ibenefit of the doubt[/i when it came to hitting the eye socket (WHICH WAS NOT FRACTURED - STOSIC PLAYED LAST WEEKEND). In other words, the RFL simply opted to believe that Cunningham did not [iintend[/i to hit Stosic's eye socket. That was the only way in which the RFL let Cunningham off. Without intent, there was no ban. However, because he now has a formal caution, if he misbehaves again while the caution is live, he will get a ban.

I'm sure that would make all you executioners very happy.