Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 10:50 am  

"hey mate, help me up Vaughny I'm f**ked"

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:16 am  

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... -revealed/

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... -revealed/

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:17 am  

Reading that he was going to be guilty no matter what was said, their minds already made up before he entered the room.

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:20 am  

CW8 wrote:

It's what saints would do, they got Knowles off a ban for the grand final in a season where I seem to remember every other appeal being deemed frivolous and resulting in a longer ban.

Knowles was cleared of that because of the contradictory wording of the charge. As trivial as this one is there are no grounds for appealing and i don't see how the RFL could let it go after other players have been banned for it ( that being said the mrp and rfl couldn't organise a mickey up in a brewery,so anything could happen )

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:33 am  

brook40 wrote:

Knowles was cleared of that because of the contradictory wording of the charge. As trivial as this one is there are no grounds for appealing and i don't see how the RFL could let it go after other players have been banned for it ( that being said the mrp and rfl couldn't organise a mickey up in a brewery,so anything could happen )

So what you are saying is because other players have been banned for said offence that they have to ban him, if only that applied in the law courts the prisons would be full. Not every offence is the same hence some latitude to how sentences are applied but seems the RFL one rule fits all. So eliminating common sense approach.

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:35 am  

https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/confirme ... ban-82305/

https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/confirme ... ban-82305/

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:36 am  

Paragraph in there talking about common sense which sadly the RFL lack.

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 12:44 pm  

Fair play to Mata'utia for his submission, respect that I can't see us getting any change on our appeal but at least we are backing our player to the hilt.

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 2:50 pm  

Bunkaib wrote:

Fair play to Mata'utia for his submission, respect that I can't see us getting any change on our appeal but at least we are backing our player to the hilt.

I believe the Saints club would only allow a brief statement by Matautia to support Vaughan, the Saints club don't trust the disciplinary at all and didn't want Matautia to incriminate himself. It was just a time wasting slow play the ball and they didn't want to give the disciplinary the opportunity to accuse and discipline him for cheating. The disciplinary are just a load of bullocks most of the time.

Re: This week’s disciplinary : Wed Sep 20, 2023 3:00 pm  

karetaker wrote:

So what you are saying is because other players have been banned for said offence that they have to ban him, if only that applied in the law courts the prisons would be full. Not every offence is the same hence some latitude to how sentences are applied but seems the RFL one rule fits all. So eliminating common sense approach.

They have to ban him ( as they did with the others ) because he doesn't know for sure if someone is injured or not,it's as simple as don't drag a player up. That's the rule,it's in no way comparable to law courts so that's not a valid analogy.