Good try!!…



I guess if wigan hadn't cancelled the reserve game we'd all be assuming (correctly) that the 2 match ban was now complete, and he'd be available to play against...wigan.
We would have been oblivious to the fact that neither SL game counted.

Don't worry, I've got another loophole.

There is nothing in the wording to indicate whether the player needs to have played a first team game this season. It just says "previously." Bans can be carried over from the previous season, so there is no reason to think everything resets just because it's a new season.

That does sound more plausible.

I haven't found anything which may scupper it (yet).

Mentioning warm-up matches kind of suggests a season by season ruling.

Maybe the cancelled reserve game is the key - the rovers game (which didn't count at the time) had already been played before it was cancelled. Can we retrospectively claim the rovers game because there was no reserve match?

I am just interested to know whether the HDM have actually been told about this by someone either from the club or RFL. Or if someone has just stumbled across these rules and made an assumption.

I can't imagine it's the club, the HDM have got it so wrong. Bans start at midnight on the day of the verdict.

I've just edited my previous post....

Agreed. He may well be banned, but not for the reasons they are reporting. There is no such thing as a ban that starts next week.

Personally I think someone has their wires crossed and that he will be selected on Sunday.

The HDM and still running another article with their take on the saga.... https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/r ... an-3861861

The HDM and still running another article with their take on the saga.... https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/r ... an-3861861

That's how I read it, an old quote by LR added to a crazy theory.

Kelly was charged on Thursday the 6th February, at a tribunal for Championship and Reserve grades.
If the hearing was after the derby, then why didn’t he play?
He would have be eligible. Not picked again?

…. because the derby was on Friday 7th February, after the hearing by my reckoning.
So not "not picked again".

so he wasn't suspended or not picked? that doesn't make sense...?

sounds to me like someone at the club has dropped a bollock not knowing the rules.
had Radford been informed then its quite possible kelly would have been on the bench for the HKR game.

That’s what I thought when he answered me ?
His response doesn’t make sense !?