Mcllorum should have got 7 games minimum if you go on the basis that the Bailey punishment was fair!! But then again Paul Wood got no ban for punching Carl Ablett in the face completely unprovoked, so god knows how the disciplinary committee works!!



Baileys punishment was the same as Rangi Chase's in the CC against Fev. Dont know how all 3 of those 'crimes' can have the same penalty!!



In reality i think it should have been:



Bailey - Warning

Wood - 3 game ban

Mcllorum - 3 game ban

Chase - 6 game ban

Nah, if you only warned people who touched refs for whatever reason, it wouldnt be too long before its like football with players grabbing refs arms for attention and screaming in their faces etc.



On subject, Wood Yellow Card, MM Red card no ban, Chase Red Card 4-6 ban.



Bailey two game ban.

I remember Hock getting a 5 game ban for grabbing the ref's arm.

tbf to Bailey he ran into the ref accidentally, whilst Hocks was a delibrate contact with the ref.

Why avoid the question?

Most people would now agree that MM was stupid and deserved a ban. The question is whether the incident should have gone on report to be delt with later as has been the case in most off the ball fouls.

This case now questions the video ref and when he can intervene. The RL say he can only adjudicate in try award decisions when asked by the referee, but it is clear in this case that the video ref (Ganson) sent MM off. Mr Child and the two touch judges were willing to allow play on.

If a video ref can now advise the match referee why is this not being made clear by the governing body. If the video ref now has more power to control a match then all matches must have cameras and a VR, we now have two standard of games, ones that are on Sky and those not. We don't have a level playing field.

If a try is allowed when it is clear to the video ref that an infringement has taken place why does he not advise the ref aka the Hardacre for Leeds during the CC semi-final after a clear knock on by Maguire.

Untill the RL make a statement to clarify this issue then we will get more calls of bias and corruption in our game.

I wasn't even close to being an attempt at a "tackle", he deliberately went to do him, its a 3 game ban and rightly so. He's let the team, the fans and the club down.

Ok, if you're actually saying woody was unprovoked throwing that punch, then I think you've lost the right to be in this conversation. Turn your computer off and walk away.

and that sums it up in one simple sentence

there is a difference between playing on, and playing advantage.



VR involvement in games has been going on for years. Puletua was sent off against Catalans on the say so of the VR.

Its odd that 11 pages in, punishment given, and most people agreeing with said punishment, that not many opposition fans don't want to discuss this, and would rather compare A's tackle to B's tackle... This is by far the bigger issure here, how the officials handle the game as it is played.

Sorry but I don’t understand this post. What has one thing got to do with the other? Both points may be correct but have no relevance to each other IMO, to say that someone is good enough to play in one game and has made a serious error in another and to pass both opinions does not seem perverse to me. If that is what you’re trying to say that is?

I think MM is a very good player who like Gaz Hock plays with a lot of passion, but like Hock often that passion is shown in the wrong way. That kind of passion doesn’t help anyone, him the team SW the fans or the club. The kind of passion needed is the Kris Radlinski George Carmont type. If players want to grandstand let it be with their abilities not inabilities. When I first saw the MM incident I was inclined to give him some benefit of the doubt but on watching it at home over again and thinking about his past behaviour (and not just what others have said) I have got to say he must change, for the sake of everyone who loves the club and the sport, I believe Hock is trying, now he must learn and try harder too!

I think that's a fair call. Hock does appear to be trying to control himself. It's called "growing up".

MM should try it.

The question you have to ask is: would a Leeds player be banned for the entire playoffs at the point?

Wasn't Webb actually spared a ban ,ast season for a 2-3 game offense at this point?



I know they're gonna appeal but realistically he's only going to drop to 2 matches if successful. That would mean that we would play Logan Tomkins for two games and if we get to the final would then drop the guy that's helped us get there for McIlorum. It's a tad unfair.

That's sport. I don't think we'll see Logan in the team though. Not with Smith and Tommy around.

Agree. It's a straight switch between MM and Smith imo.

RFL have confirmed that McIlloroum will appeal the ban - embarrassing.

So if someone is provoked that makes it OK to punch them?

Not sure why it's embarrassing?



I'm not surprised he got banned (though if that includes a Grand Final, it would be harsh). But as things stand he's gone for the season, so he might as well appeal it. He's nothing to lose, and neither have Wigan.



And please nobody say we could lose respect. We don't have much of that in the eyes of our opponents anyway.

double post