I don't disagree with that. I was infuriated a few years ago with Sky, when Phil Clark said that Shaun Wane only won so much at Wigan because Wigan spent more money than anyone else. It was a blatant lie, seemingly designed to denigrate Shaun Wane's achievements as Wigan coach, and no one challenged him on it.

Things like that can indeed be damaging. It's frustrating, but it seems to be the story of our life. It's certainly nothing new.

Ellis and Walters one game ban each, it's a conspiracy against us (RedVee mode activated)

How Hiku and Opacic got away with their offences and Walter gets pulled up for his I’ll never know

Is this definite? I've seen conflicting reports. If this is right it's an absolute joke that Hiku hasn't received a substantial ban.

Similar to how the NRL explain 'bunker' decisions, I think we need to start seeing a weekly video where these MRP decisions are explained (and yes Wigan have had questionable calls go their way as well).

This isn't contact apparently


[urlhttps://twitter.com/FrEaK_HullFC/status/1791842886297805116?t=hIRAcQnhwROgl0GxsKTo4g&s=19[/url

Nice to know that this is now considered acceptable contact. Let's get a few of them in next week lads see where it gets us!

That is baffling with how crazy they have gone with head contact this season, even with it now toned down that should be multiple games. Clear as day he makes shoulder contact direct to the head in an overly aggressive challenge, and this isn't some obscure angle this was shown on BBC!!

I’ve give up worrying about it now. I don’t want to see any players banned because it’s that inconsistent every none ban feels like a win.


Ellis can have a rest, so no problem there but it’s a shame to see Walters back out of a game. Hiku is a very very lucky lad. It makes no sense but none of it does.

You can even see Field's head rock back on contact! Can you imagine had that been Byrne (or Knowles or Lees for that matter) carrying out that assault?

But let's play devil's advocate for a minute and enter the panel's fantasy world where no contact took place. It's still clear as day what his intention was. This was not an accident that occured whilst making a tackle. He drops on an already prone player with the sole intention to cause pain or injury! How does sanctioning that type of behavior reconcile with the much quoted duty of care?

The panel is a joke and simply not fit for purpose and needs replacing with competent people who actually know what they are doing.

I might comment on these decisions but then I'm usually quite "meh! Let's move on". However, this one makes me really angry. There's inconsistent and then there's incompetent and this firmly falls into the latter category.

I thought the Asiata decisions last year were a farce but I can see how they didn't contravene the rules of the day (they should have done but that's a different argument). This, however, clearly contravenes current rules and, maybe more importantly, current directives around head safety. Given the threat to the game regarding insurance etc, to ignore, even encourage, this type of behavior is tantamount to dereliction of duty.

Better be squeaky clean over the next two weeks, wouldn’t put it past this panel to ruin the final with bans, Williams and French banned anyone ?

Exactly, this isn't a deflection from the shoulder leading to a brush on the head with the fingers as a consequence, i would go as far as to call this a malicious challenge where i would expect a ban given out for many years now.