Most football clubs have an internal disciplinary code for sendings-off, yellow cards etc. with the financial penalties agreed by the PFA. I would not be surprised if something similar existed in RL but just not publicised to the same extent.

If you look at the RFL disciplinary decisions virtually every SL player is fined £300, regardless of the length of the ban. I guess that there is something in place whereby the clubs dock wages at a given level as well while a player is serving a ban to differentiate between the severity of the offences on a financial level.

Hohaia is lucky Flower didnt press charges against him also.

You're seriously making that distinction as if it makes some kind of difference? Then go on to say ''there are no Hohaia apologists''. Seriously? Have you never heard of irony in St Helens? The fact is Hohaia escalated something that happens in almost all games and turned it into something that resulted in bans. His being the FIRST incident that required a ban btw!

I'm also not deluded as you'd no doubt know if you actually read my posts rather than responding in such a knee jerk way. At no point have I EVER said Flower's actions were justified. I have even said on this very thread that his actions were inexcusable. What does get my goat though is this constant insistence by certain Saints fans, yourself included, that he somehow 'started it'. Unless you accept that every penalty should be open season for the players to take summary justice, then he didn't 'start it'. No more than it could be said that the first penalty given away by Saints should have resulted in the Saints player being elbowed (or forearmed if you prefer!) for his indiscretion. Is that seriously what you're arguing for? I understand you coach junior rugby. Is that what you tell your charges? I certainly hope not! The fact is, penalties are a part of any sport. Taking the law into your own hands isn't. That's what Hohaia did and that's why he 'started it'...

Just one more point. If you're so keen on pedantry how come you were so keen to distinguish between an elbow and a forearm hit; something that ultimately has no real bearing on the offence or the punishment yet you somehow failed to point out that Hohaia actually got a 2 match ban, not a 1 match ban? Very strange that, don't you think? No Hohaia apologists? Don't make me laugh!

Does anyone else have a problem with Wigan's choice of the term 'gross misconduct'?

I mean there are any number of precedents here. Players punching other players is a fact of life in RL. So is retaliation.

So if the banning of punching isn't laid out in the players Code of Conduct in their contracts then I find it hard to see that it was Gross Misconduct.

There was no mention of Gross Misconduct when Lee Mossop floored Magennis the other year for example.

If Ben Flower misses a few tackles next season, he will be told in no uncertain terms by coaches, team mates and fans 'to get fu**ing stuck in'.

It seems to me that if players are expected to compete in the most physical game (arguably) in world sport, but the moment they take that physicality too far, it is deemed Gross Misconduct, then that is ridiculous.

I am in agreement with the other posters who argue that it is idiots who get offended by anything these days that are the problem. Admit it, the extreme physicality of RL and the way players fight it out rather than diving on the floor, is what attracts many of us to the game anyway. Just look at two incidents from the Everton v West Ham game on Match of the Day and ask yourself why weren't Barkley (diving when not touched) and Tomkins (feigning injury to the head) guilty of Gross Misconduct? Give me an honest fist fight any day.

Rant over

I don't like the misconduct charge but also think this is just a public show by the club to be seen to do something while actually doing little behind closed doors or I hope it is.

What sickens me is the suggestion of rehabilitation (from Saint's chairman) and counselling from Wigan as something that's needed. I can understand some support in regards to the press outcry and what that must to but anything related to the actual incident in this respect is utter nonsense.

Fighting, whilst outside the rules, is in the normal range of things that we accept will happen at every SL club every season, just like high tackles, sin bins and dismissals. What Flower did goes well beyond that and IMO definitely constitutes gross misconduct. I would be amazed if there is nothing in the player's code of conduct outlining how they are expected to conduct themselves on and off the pitch. He has brought both the game and our club into disrepute and very seriously endangered another player's safety. Surely there has to be a limit on what our club find acceptable from one of our players on the pitch.

This should have been kept in house under the "Internal Disciplinary Procedure" guise.
It would have been forgotten as the new season approaches.
Keeping it public has completely overblown the matter.

After all, who remembers what happened to the RFL investigation into the crowd trouble at the Widnes v Cas Cup semi. Been kept underwraps so much so that the only thing the RFL have done with Widnes was to give them the "Club of the Year" award.
We heard it all at the time, disgraceful, brought the game into disrepute, fans involved would be banned and arrests made.
Neither the RFL or Widnes have said anything and it's long forgotten.

This is a disgrace.

so your saying that everyone who throws TWO or more punches in the heat of the moment should be charged with Gross Misconduct?

Punches are thrown on a regular basis in rugby league, and if everyone got a 6 month ban for throwing two, then teams would struggle to field a full side late on in the season.
What he did was stupid, he lost his head for a split second and is paying for it mentally I suspect, and that will hurt more than any fine or ban.
The punishment is OTT in my opinion, and talk of rehabilitation and such rubbish is just that...rubbish.
Had a player done that on a Sunday afternoon game with no cameras he would have got 3 or 4 games and no fine.
Because it was a showpiece game the RFL have made an example of him, a scapegoat for their own shortcomings if you like.
And I am disgusted that the club have chosen to pillorying the lad in public, it should have been kept behind closed doors.

No, I think it's very obvious I'm not saying that. There is a massive different between that and what Flower did

so what is the difference? Both are excessive use of force no matter how you look at it

I agree but to me it is obvious this is a PR exercise form Wigan as much as anything. Under IL the club has gone out of its way to tow the line and not seem anything like as confrontational or controversial as back in the days of Mo and DW. The only things I can recall under IL where he has differed in his opinion from the RFL is his opposition to the new league structure, being pro marquee player (but then it wasn't the RFL who opposed that anyway but other clubs) and the fait accompli deal with Sky over the TV deal. He has been on-side with just about everything else.

It is not the first time a club has fined a player when the player has already been punished by the RFL with a suspension. So for me the question is why does the club feel the need to go so far? Players can usually expect some sort of punishment from their club if they go OTT so why not just a fine and that be the end of it? Why all the gross misconduct narrative and talk of rehabilitation?

I also don't like the term "rehabilitation". He is not a psychopath or someone addicted to violence. There are other players who have the reputation for being thugs who if Flower has to be "rehabilitated" are a lost cause.

Flower knows what he did and will always think he cost his teammates the Grand Final so if there is to be any rehabilitation it should be making sure he is an effective player again not afraid to mix it when required. That isn't how the idea of rehabilitation is coming across to me.