The crimes committed are not the same, so why should the punishments be the same? Cas sacked the lad involved in the Cockayne incident - should Saints sack Pryce?

Would Cas have sacked the reserve grade player no-one has heard of if he was a star player in the first team?

Pryce has been dealt with by the justice system, what Saints choose to do, is completely at their discretion unless the RFL say otherwise.

I know little more about the facts than anyone else, but I do have some expertise in this field, and so I can help a bit.

The case was dealt with in the Magistrates Court, and so it was always at the lesser end of the spectrum. They both denied it initially but then admitted it later on, which isn't uncommon. An immediate guilty plea results in a one-third reduction in what the case otherwise merits, and so the maxiumum possible sentence would have been four months had they pleaded guilty straight away. They would have lost some of that reduction, but even a guilty plea on the day of the trial would have resulted in a ten percent reduction.

It is not uncommon for a court to adjourn for sentence with a view to sending someone to prison and then step back from that on the day of sentence. Although some may take the view that it was a deliberate frightener by the judge, the initial view on sentence will have been based upon the information available to the court at the time. On the actual sentence date, the court will have additional information, which will have no doubt included testimonials and references and also a fuller account of the defendants's remorse. This often mitigates away from the initial indication.

It should be noted that Reardon did receive a prison sentence, except that it was suspended. Pryce's previous misdemeanour will have been taken into account, along with the fact that he took a lesser role (ie, he didn't assault someone in a domestic context, and to some extent, went along for the ride). Also, the case was dealt with by a Deputy District Judge, who is a solicitor or barrister employed as a professional judge, and therefore will have sentenced in accordance with the appropriate guidelines, and who would have been less likely to be swayed by the fame of the defendants (such as it is in relation to Reardon).

As someone with some expertise in this field, and from what I know about the case, was I surprised at the sentence? No, not really, is the answer.

I hope this helps.

Personally Pryce going to jail would not make a scrap of difference to me, neither would it help our club. But I totally agree withyou on his previous misdemeanor. The man ought to have gone to jail and still be in there for what he did.

Same here no difference to me. Pryce seems a nice guy whenever i have spoken to him.

Peter Sutcliffe was a real laugh at parties,let's release him!!

None of the crimes warrented custodial sentences, that was exactly the judge's verdict, what employers do is up to them, some do the right thing, some don't!! Admitedly it's easier to release a has been or a never will be from his contract or suspend a lesser known player, however incidents like this bring our game into the spotlight and how the clubs act should send a clear message, we don't want our stars acting like this.
Failure to act sends out the wrong message, totally.

you are judge judy and i claim my £20 (you can afford it)

Your the CEO of HBOS! I claim my £175 million!!!!

make it 50 quid then ......on 2nd thoughts 20 pence