There's a dangerous level of agreement between us and Rovers at the moment, but I also agree with Hudge

Saw that too Wilf. Hudgell is right to make a statement tomorrow. The guy at the centre of the review panel is Steve Ganson as far as I know - it certainly was him last year and I assume this year too. Taking all thought of bias etc out of the equation would anyone really trust a guy with a career littered with incompetency to head up an important judicial style process requiring transparency and an ability to follow due procedure? I know my answer.

the kr fans on the their board seem to think it was a bad one by Poore .

That's not the point though, it's that others have gotten away with similar incidents.

if the rfl coulldnt decide which player from widnes was guilty of the tackle on whiting, all 3 should have copped 1 game minimum!

It was the ref that couldn't decide. Should have red carded all three

is it the fact that the city of hull have got 2 teams in the SL,and the rfl don`t like it,so coming down harder on the players from fc and kr,may dishearten the fans to the extent,that they will stop attending the games,and therefore,destroy one or both of the clubs.just a thought.

As said by 1865, if us or Rover have players doing bad tackles then yes they should be banned. However it's inconsistency we are looking for. Why do Paea, Ellis and Poore (twice) get banned when there are incidents like Ben Flowers, Westwood's and Bowen's who get let off Scott free.
Different teams play to a different set of rules.

I’ve no problem with Poore being banned, the man is a tool, but if the whiting one is as bad then there is a lot to answer for from the RFL.
Watching SL full time was interesting seeing Rich Agars interview about Gansons intervention at half time with the ref, low and behold second half Wakey got hammered by pens and lost a close one to saints. John Kear was fully behing RA on that one as well. Wonder if it’s a coincidence RA had a piece in one of the league papers criticising the way the ‘unfashionable’ clubs get dealt with by the RFL both in terms of disciplinary and went on to talk about visa’s and speed of RFL support.

Tbf RFL are just issuing bans on the grade of the challenge been put forward by the refs, so they are acting & dealing with each incident reported correctly,so it is bad calls by refs not to put the bowen or westwood incidents on report, people saying we live in hull we are been victimized by the RFL is nonsense imo..it is down to refs not having a pair & making the right calls in certain (top 4) clubs games.

An incident does not have to be put on report during the game for a player to be brought before the disciplinary panel.

As RG says every game is scrutinised afterwards by the Match Review Panel (Ganson + some ex players) and charges are brought forward as a result of that scrutiny regardless of whether referees placed incidents on report or not during a game. It's the inner workings of this particular set of individuals which appears to be to be totally lacking in any consistency or logic.

So why do we have 'on report' anyway if they look at every game? Seems a bit of a pointless exercise

Very much so. Maybe they think it will appease the fans in some way. It doesn't work - am I right in thinking it was an idea we got from Australia ?

I get that.. but unless the refs man up on certain players the game will always look corrupt.