I wonder how many mind readers there are not using their talent fully. People seem to know what Hauraki was thinking at the very moment of the incident.

Its in his weekly cut and paste

I still think its a pretty good analogy. To be convicted of murder there needs to be intent ("malice aforethought"icon_wink.gif but a conviction for manslaughter can be based on gross negligence.

Hiowever I don't understand your point.

We both agree that it was not intentional and that he didn't admit that it was.

He was charged with making a reckless tackle. By pleading guilty he was not admitting it was deliberate or intentional. Those who disagree need to look up the definition of reckless.

By the way where did you get your law degree from?

eBay. Same as Doctor Koukash.

Other than the referees growing bigger balls and dishing out the red card on the pitch (I acknowledge there will always be unsighted incidents that need to be put in report), we're always going to be disappointed with a player who subsequently gets a ban at the disciplinary. This belated ban doesn't benefit the team that suffered as a result of the misdemeanour. To that end, the team that would have been playing against the 12, 11 or whatever men of the opposition (had there been a dismissal) should be awarded a point by the RFL to try and restore some advantage.

So after last week, we draw, get one competition point, Huaraki gets a subsequent ban and we get another disciplinary point. I know it's a ridiculous proposal but it's in keeping with many of the ridiculous decisions made at Red Hall whether that be splitting the league or unfathomable disciplinary outcomes

Just noticed it mentioned that he's appealing the 2nd match of the ban. Hearing tomorrow night.

I've only just watched it, I think 2 matches is harsh, I wouldn't even call what happened reckless, careless yes, reckless..no.
He had no way of knowing his knee was going to come into contact with Abdul's head when trying to regather his feet and frankly I'd say the RFL have no legimate way of proving otherwise in the split second it all happened in.(though being the RFL they make shiate up as they go along)
For those saying he had two 'attempts' at kneeing Abdul in the head and that he 'looked' at him whilst doing so (as if to say he was aiming his knee) are way off the mark.

Both players have a duty of care to each other in a tackle or completed tackle. If he didn't mean to do it on purpose then he was reckless in his actions and could have caused a serious injury.

why wait a week to appeal? oh yes, cc semi final and millington injured!

ban should be upheld imo, if they wanted to appeal they should've done earlier

I don't understand how he can be allowed to appeal. He didn't contest the charge so presumably accepted the severity grade. Lodging an EGP results in the minimum punishment for the grade, which in this case was 2 matches. What possible grounds could there be for an appeal?

The fact that there's even a hearing is farcical TBH.

This is the RFL were anything is possible , Agree with everything though , Lodging an egp should have brought an end to it .

Is this a joke?? He looked down, went for Abdul with his left knee and missed, looked again, and smashed him with his right knee! If he gets to play the semi, it's nothing short of a disgrace! And I like Cas!!!

A joke..what because I don't agree with people's OPINION

I saw it in real time and in slow motion and I still don't see him 'aiming' as some have said, he didn't 'smash down' his knee, his knee came down on his head for sure and with a certain amount of force but that was mainly due to his weight and body position. The force of which was not enough on its own to cause the injury to Abdul.
With Yeaman holding WH down where is he supposed to put his head when there is force put upon it? It may appear he's 'looking' in the direction of Abdul but to suggest this is deliberate foul play (which the RFL don't) then you're blessed with a greater insight into body language and the mind of that player than the greatest psychologists ever
It was careless and nothing more and should have been 1 match tops if not just a warning.

Forget re-igniting the debate on intent. As has been pointed out the real joke now that the grading that committee came up with was implicitly accepted by Hauraki with his EGP and that should be case closed. No appeal should be considered for a even a microsecond, and if Hauraki really wants to press on and alter his claim punish him for lying in the first place.

Not forgetting that he may run the risk of having his punishment increased???????