As you say it's not available to him - grade C and below.

When a player is put on report ' he should also be sin binned.
If he is then banned for foul play , he should serve his ban ,and also be banned the next time the 2 sides involved meet.
Also the ban should be for the length of the injury incurred, if any by the victim of the act .
The RFL need to crack down on these deliberate acts .

And if (as is often the case) the side offended against have a player go off injured either in the course of the game or as a result of the foul what then? No advantage at all. 12 against 13 is the way it has to be.

Yes but 13 against 13 and an On Report is the way it is. My proposal is an attempt to find a compromise that is workable.


This doesn't happen in the NFL. Massive fines and the threat of legal action should be sufficient to stop coaches from being so foolish.

But no where in the rules does it say that's the way it is. To me and many others it seems to be the unwritten rule and its wrong. There should be no compromise. Foul play is foul play and should be punished there and then. It's a team sport. If you are sent off you have to be accountable to your team. It's been like that since time immortal.

Azza could have been seriously injured on Friday night and gone off. He was THE man IMO to turn the game. That was for my mind why Elima went for him. We could have been down to 16 players if Elima had his way. By your compromise so would Catalans. Our best player out of the game and an even field. That's not justice and is not a punishment for foul play.

As I have said before, the officials as a collective need to act there and then and not on a Monday afternoon around a table with drinks and chummy talk in their office at Red Hall.

We're not the NFL and the RFL aren't known for their consistency when it comes to disciplinary matters. An example of this will be seen when we see if Bradford receive a points deduction for their recent administration and the amount they are deducted.

Also, who would you take legal action against? The club? The coach? The offending player? Would you be able to prove it was intentional? Clubs are struggling. Would they have the money to initiate legal proceedings when there is no guarantee they could win? Would they actually get any money from another struggling club if they did win?

I agree however under my compromise Elima would have been Ejected which is better than what actually happened.

We've had the On Report rule for ten years now and everyone (except maybe the referees) shares the opinion that it doesn't work very well. That's ten years without the situation being addressed. I don't think we're going to see a crack-down any time soon and that's why I think a compromise is necessary. There's no point demanding change that is never going to happen. Better surely to demand change that could happen.



I am not unaware of the differences between the NFL and the RFL. However it is worth noting that a sport with a lot more money in it than ours does not have the situation that you imagine will occur.

In any case, I think that under the current system players go out to deliberately injure each other. The threat of a red card didn't stop Elima from doing what he did, did it?

get rid of the idiots at redhall,and bring in some new faces who can see what needs to be changed on the disciplinery side of things.

I fancy a few old players would assist with that. Played the game, know the tricks and know what it's like being on the end of them. Just not G Schofield as all our players would be banned

The main problem, as usual, comes from the RFL and it is one of transparency. We need to know what th eofficial rules are regarding video ref interventions in such cases. As it stands at the moment it is far too inconsistent.

In cases of a bit of a skirmish then i think the ref having a word with the captains is an appropriate measure to take to keep 13 v 13. However if it caries on referees MUST have the confidence to send a man off. I do get the feeling though that the stronger a referee is the less he will be protected by the RFL

I agree that your ejection idea is better than the on report option we currently have. Any actual punishment a player receives would be better than no punishment at all. But I still think that a sin bin/sending off is better than the ejection idea. It's not that big a change to ask. The option to do that is there for the refs to use.



The situation I presented doesn't occur in that sport? Isn't that more likely down to the NFL being a better organised system with it's rules and punishments than what we currently have in RL? I know very little about NFL but just because the system works in that sport doesn't mean it will work in ours.



Maybe players do go out to deliberately hurt another player under the current rules. But they probably know that there is more chance of them being put on report than receiving a sin binning or sending off so they probably feel it's worth the risk.

Isn't that what they can do now knowing they will just get put on report?

How about everything at once? On a red card the player is ejected, he gets put on report, his team is reduced by a man for 10 minutes and the opposition is awarded a penalty.

And. Right. And... if the game is on Sky we use the video referee to decide if the offending player goes in the stocks afterwards to be pilloried by the opposition fans. Sky could even get a supermarket to sponsor the rotten veg.

Vote Cuckoo for RFL President. Tough on refs. Tough on the causes of refs.

If they do then that's another reason why on report should be dropped for simply using yellow and red cards.