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.

Banned for 4 games.

I said before that generally the serious thuggery of 10 or 20 years ago has gone from the game. Players are more professional and are 99% of the time not setting about to deliberately injure others. The RFL disciplinary though sees the same players time and time again without doing anything about persistent offenders. Players that lead with an elbow , raise their knees , put knees in the back etc etc just carry on and get a warning letter and a £300 fine , if that. Everyone knows the players concerned , and Elima is one , but you'll then get a "one-off" high shot that gets a straight red probably for a player with a decent record who's mistimed a tackle and then gets SOS after it's been looked at again. We and other clubs have been the victim of both losing a player to a red card when we shouldn't have and losing a player injured by foul play where the perpetrator stays on. Interpretation , variations , a lack of consistency and a lack of transparency are the problem and that's usually from the RFL rather than the refs who will of course make mistakes and be at varying standards just like players. I understand that Ashley Klein seems to have developed into a good referee in Oz but whilst here he was probably deemed the worst ever which leads me to think that it's the rules they're working with and all the weekly changes of emphasis that cause the problems much of the time.

doesn't do us any favours though, good job we won the game!

it's ridiculous, as you say good job we won.

Shows up Ganson & Smith as that clowns that they are, they both saw the replays and could have / shoud have intervened.

Still glad he got 4 games tho.....

Should have been more.

Heremaia could have missed the rest of the season.

as i've stated on another thread if a player is guilty of a high shot bad enough to go on report he should be sin binned.the rule that its red or nothing is a joke as all refs will bottle it knowing the on report option is there.all refs should have to wear the head camera all the time so the head of refs can see their position therefore making the old "i had my view obstructed" excuse harder to use.how a player like soliola can stay on after his high shot is against wire was a joke.if he had got binned chances are the wilkin,turner and waterhouse head highs would'nt of happened.

Is the tackle watchable anywhere as I've only seen the game live ?

Iplayer super league show?

https://twitter.com/rflreferees/status/ ... 3787266049 https://twitter.com/rflreferees/status/ ... 5781058560 Response to my tweet to the RFL refs asking for clarification. So despite every Sky viewer seeing serious foul play the VR saw nothing. Words fail me on this one. Glad he's banned and 4 games is a reasonable ban, but it could have left Azza out for months. Maybe the fact it didn't had an effect on the length of ban. (I doubt that, just playing devis advocate).

https://twitter.com/rflreferees/status/ ... 3787266049 https://twitter.com/rflreferees/status/ ... 5781058560 Response to my tweet to the RFL refs asking for clarification. So despite every Sky viewer seeing serious foul play the VR saw nothing. Words fail me on this one. Glad he's banned and 4 games is a reasonable ban, but it could have left Azza out for months. Maybe the fact it didn't had an effect on the length of ban. (I doubt that, just playing devis advocate).

Cheers it's not on I player until tomorrow as far as I can see