|
|
Post by gadger on Sept 28, 2020 13:26:30 GMT
Both out of the semi by the looks of it
|
|
|
|
Post by beckett on Sept 28, 2020 13:45:50 GMT
Need to appeal, what’s to lose? Also Yates only 1 game ban ain’t it so will miss tomorrow’s game?
|
|
|
|
Post by stuckinyorkshire on Sept 28, 2020 13:48:21 GMT
Need to appeal, what’s to lose? Also Yates only 1 game ban ain’t it so will miss tomorrow’s game? |
|
|
|
Post by gadger on Sept 28, 2020 13:50:27 GMT
Need to appeal, what’s to lose? Also Yates only 1 game ban ain’t it so will miss tomorrow’s game? Ban starts after tomorrow’s meaningless friendly. Joke. |
|
|
|
Post by beckett on Sept 28, 2020 13:53:41 GMT
Ruined the game that, as if Warrington need any help anyway. Game is so bent.
|
|
|
|
Post by bonitared on Sept 28, 2020 14:30:32 GMT
Watson confirms both being appealed
|
|
|
|
Post by johnh1 on Sept 28, 2020 14:38:49 GMT
If it was Saints, I’d be confident of both playing. As it is they will probably both get their bans increased.
|
|
|
|
Post by SalfordSlim on Sept 28, 2020 15:21:32 GMT
What was Yates' offence? I missed a large chunk of the game as was travelling.
And wasn't Fash cited for a cannonball tackle? So how can that be a Grade A if both ours are Grade B?🤔
|
|
|
|
Post by woody74 on Sept 28, 2020 16:07:01 GMT
If it was Saints, I’d be confident of both playing. As it is they will probably both get their bans increased. Agreed. It would be a certainty to get overturned if it was a Saints or Wigan player. Game is so corrupt at times. Can you imagine the disappointment within the hierarchy if little old Salford got to Wembley?? Stinks. |
|
|
|
Post by woody74 on Sept 28, 2020 16:09:19 GMT
What was Yates' offence? I missed a large chunk of the game as was travelling. And wasn't Fash cited for a cannonball tackle? So how can that be a Grade A if both ours are Grade B?🤔 Fash's was the worst of the lot mate. At least Sarge was committed to an extent. Fash just deliberately targeted the knees. Career ending hit that they need to stamp out. |
|
|
|
Post by russ on Sept 28, 2020 16:10:21 GMT
I think being suspicious of the judiciary is par for the course like refs.
But I still don't understand why 10 minutes and then a ban?
|
|
|
|
Post by johnh1 on Sept 28, 2020 16:18:17 GMT
I think being suspicious of the judiciary is par for the course like refs. But I still don't understand why 10 minutes and then a ban? Naiqama committed the same offence as Sarge. If Sarge’s is not overturned, as Naiqama’s was, then the RFL disciplinary should at least give an explanation. If they don’t then I think it is perfectly fair for them to be accused of favouritism. |
|
|
|
Post by bonitared on Sept 28, 2020 16:31:00 GMT
The big problem is that tomorrow’s game doesn’t count. The RFL state that it’s 24 hours after the day in which the tribunal took place.
Odd that this is the one rule that hasn’t been adapted in the Covid era
|
|
|
|
Post by giasf on Sept 28, 2020 17:41:39 GMT
www.rugby-league.com/article/57134/disciplinary--match-review-panel"Suspensions begin from midnight on the night of any hearing, which in this case would mean Tuesday evening and therefore this week's Tuesday night Super League fixtures will not count towards the bans imposed by today's Match Review Panel." Eh? If the hearing happened today (presumably) then based on that sentence - the ban should begin from midnight tonight? Who is on this disciplinary panel?
|
|
|
|
Post by JJR on Sept 28, 2020 17:56:02 GMT
I wonder why people stop watching RL?
Remember the Hock 10 and Chase 6 suspensions.
|
|
