Didn’t take long, there is always one who wants to make a ludicrous stand against the obvious.

Let’s get one thing straight, it’s embarrassing in your opinion. Seeing as you’re a faceless cyber warrior and thus an absolute nobody then your opinion is pretty much worthless.

Bye

Normally I’d agree but I’m not sure this is just a trough.

A reduced SKY deal and no other broadcaster even remotely interested.

Salford and London maybe about to go pop.

No reserve grade.

The ridiculous spectacle of some teams having no junior set up at all.

Both open age and age limit amateur RL on its knees.

Virtually no representation in schools.

The RFL having to sell Red hall to make ends meet.

Sponsorship at an all time low.

An England team with no real chance of success in the WC.

Like it or not the product on the pitch is not inspiring people at present and much of that is down to the current laws of the game.

It may not be terminal but IMO it’s more than a trough. The game is in the worst state I’ve seen since the mid seventies. Also much of the rot set in long before Covid.

The game now needs a root and branch overhaul and that includes the disciplinary which for me is purely another gravy train for those with the right hand shake (don’t take that literally)

Or maybe the disciplinary panel had a bit more time on their hands this week with a lot less games being played and so gave some decisions that they would have ignored in a normal week.
If these incidents were worthy of viewing, let alone cautions then it would take the panel the whole week to review a full round of games.
They are inconsistent with their decision making and that is what causes the frustration that led to Carter's statement IMO.

Up until recently we’d done pretty well out of the disciplinary, i think we went a couple of seasons (or thereabouts) without anyone receiving a ban. But this year for sone reason its gone haywire and it’s not just us, most teams are suffering at their hands and many for trivial reasons. Most are the same people in the panel as previously and they generally are all ex-players so the diktat must have changed from above.

It’s just another poor call from the RFL and Vastman sums up the many problems quite well in his post. You could add to that a major malaise amongst the games current fanbase which is leading to many turning away, i and my family for one is one of those. In addition as a general rule many clubs have an ageing following and it certainly isn’t attracting the same amount of new followers to replace them. The point i’d possibly disagree with is that it might not be terminal. It could well be if things don’t change soon, at least as a full-time professional sport.

Have it in for Trinity, have you actually read the statement? Since when did Mata'utia play for Wakefield? Or does that part not fit in with your agenda, so you just ignore it?

TBF to The Ghost I think he must have some affiliation with the review panel which leaves him completely delusional to what everyone else can see... He defends them to the high heaven even when they are clearly wrong as I thought they were with the grading of the Tetevano ban against his own club, Sir Kev and Agar also come out publicly and thought they got the grading wrong, obviously they know nothing about the laws of the game either.

The Tetavano hit was dangerous and late. It fully deserved what it was given.

This is nothing to do with any particular club. The game has to take foul play seriously and it is doing. The sooner the players stop committing those acts the sooner the bans will fall off.

If you believe that a hand on the back like Rocky Hampshire's was foul play and deserved a ban, then you're out to lunch and may I suggest you start watching ladies netball.

But the points you raise are redundant, when you say because Carter questions the bans he "Knows nothing about the laws of the game" but surely Sinfield and Agar do? So which one is it?

I`m pretty sure just about every coach in the league has questioned bans, sure some of them will be them throwing the teddy out of the cot because they will have players unavailable, but when you get people from other clubs starting to question other teams bans what do they have to gain from that? The Disciplinary panel is Inconsistency, that's clear for me to see, its clear for every coach in the league to see but yet you can`t see it?

This is the problem when you get people with no vision or business nous in charge of organisations. They make them bureaucratic. They turn it into an exercise in implementing whatever they have devised in endless meetings, attended by people whose only interest is in maintaining their employment, where everything is led by a flipchart. You could see it in the awkward body language between Rimmer and Elstone whenever Elstone was required to be with him. You can see it in the way Carney gets into Rimmer's ribs whenever he appears on Sky.

I get that Rimmer's brief is the broader game, not just the top flight, but the broader game is only benefited when there is a vibrant top flight. It needs running by people with vision and with experience of making money and making turnstiles click, not by people whose only desire is to tick compliance boxes.

Could well be the beginnings of a Super League breakaway. Hopefully, Carter has ensured Wakey is invited.

As for the broader point, it is ridiculous to sanction minor collisions in a brutal collision sport. Bans should be reserved for contact that is deliberately or recklessly aimed at the head in such a way that serious injury or concussion could follow, or where there is deliberate and dangerous contact with other areas of the body. You cannot aim to make the game faster and then sanction for minor collisions, as their risk is enhanced. There will be collisions in a collision sport.

The game isn't dead. But people like Rimmer will suck the life out of it.

Yup, for example they put together a panel which devised the current system. Michael Carter was one of the four members.

You are hilarious.

One minute having a go at Carter "for not knowing the rules" and then confirming that he helped devise the current system.
He would have been a very strange choice if his knowledge of the rules and systems is a poor as YOU seem to believe.
However, it's not the system that is necessarily at fault, it's the view of the current panel, who, this week, with very little to go through, have seemed to look very, very hard for something to justify this weeks wages.
If we were talking about a swinging arm or shoulder charge or something that caused injury, fair enough but, they're not even close.
If they follow the same pattern for all fixtures, EVERY side will have to default on their fixtures

Sorry I meant perhaps not as familiar as he might be with the on field rules which are leading to charges.

The off field stuff I'm sure he's all over those processes.

MC has stuck a stick in the hornets nest and not before time

I suggest you listen to the chris Chester pre Salford game interview, he explains why the club is unhappy with the review panel, and it’s not just the trinity club who are unhappy with that lot.