McDermott seems to miss the fact he'd had his say as well in the build up to the decision.

If he wants to compare it to a legal trial then maybe he should have kept quiet as well. It'd be like a witness to a murder saying in the build up to the trial 'yeah I saw him stab her in the head with those scissors but honestly he was just trying to cut her hair and slipped, he's a good lad really'.

He can't have it both ways.

They're getting a bit stressed on the VT too now.

rlhttp://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?f

Boo hoo Brian

And I quote "

"We considered an appeal," he said. "There was a bit of merit in doing that. But we thought they gave us a fair hearing. Sometimes you come out thinking you might as well have not turned up but, in fairness to the panel, they listened.

"I felt we put up a good case and I think it went as well as it could have done. If we did anything, we probably got it down from a two-game ban to one game.

"Unfortunately, with what's been said in the media building up to it, it would have been a tough call to not ban him.

"I'm just not sure that in any legal case you'd be allowed to say what you want in the media building up to it."
Which loosely translated means Shaun Wane influenced the panel by getting them to give Danny Maguire a Ban that was less than what his own coach thought he should get?
Plus he doesn't think you can influence any legal case by speaking to the media about it before hand even though He was the one that brought it up in the first place saying he shouldnt get banned for a tackle that he thought "later"he was lucky if anything to get down to a 1 game ban from a 2?

To be fair, if the Disciplinary Panel didn't have a history of showing leniency towards Leeds players, I doubt SW would have even commented on it. Like most people on here, I'm sure he was also expecting McGuire to ridiculously get no ban for what he did.

Right decision, move on.

Brian McDermott is essentially claiming the judiciary was influenced by Wane and the media, what's worse having an opinion on an illegal on-field play or effectively claiming the governing body is corrupt and influenced by opposition coaches?

If that opinion has no credibilty because it is the opinion of a hypocrit, then both are worthless

It was an illegal stiff arm to the head FFS! Wane wanted consistancy after McIllorum was handed the harshest ban possible for his challenge. If anything McGuire got away lightly with just one match. Wind your neck in McDermott.

You too.....

Sinfield's having a dig now.

The most worrying thing is now Wane has fired him up to make another one of those cringing speeches should they get through and win at Old Trafford. The one where he'll thank everyone for firing them up on route via their criticism and thank their support for 'sticking by them'.

If sticking by them means slating the coach and certain players for 95% of the season and hardly any bothering to turn up for Challenge cup semis and finals I'm backing him all the way!

I quite liked that speech last year and would have probably said something similar myself in that position. They'd been told by practically everyone that they were crap and would win nothing. We were meant to destroy them at Wembley and they were supposed to limp out the playoffs. Good on him I say. The only difference I'd want Wigan to make would be to discredit the playoffs and refuse to celebrate, but that would never happen.

It was fine until he started bigging the Leeds fans up.

They'd been their biggest critics and the ones that had heaped the most pressure on. They proved this by not turning out for the CC final against us and calling for the coaches head constantly(and some players).

Have a go at your detractors all you want but don't spoil it by praising your biggest ones.