Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

RFL Disciplinary Process


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 Errol Stock

Errol Stock
  • Coach
  • 486 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 02:38 PM

Have read the thread on the latest incident and how it was dealt with - its obvious that change is required.

The accusations of favouritism now are similar to those in the 80's when Wigan were the only full time club and Morris Lindsey was at the peak of his influence.

None of us on this forum can ever really know what goes on behind the scenes and therefore, the obvious inconsistences of the "trial" and the "sentence" could minimized by a review of the current publicly available system.

With regards to Hetherington or anyone else holding sway at RFL, not sure if this is the case - but if we have a contributor who can post a non libellous contradiction - looking forward to it.

Whats wrong now;

1. At "trial" - a lawyer may be involved.
2. Because of 1. above - "technicalities" come into play.
3. Video evidence is used BUT written reports from the match officials are submitted and MUST match the video or the player can escape on a technicality.
4. The match officials must write the report based on a) memory and b)their field of view in a split second. Officials cannot write a report after seeing a frame be frame analysis.

Therefore, extreme incidents can remain unpunished or have a low sentence purely down to lawyers playing with words - "technicalities" Additionally, the disciplinary panel seem to have no consistent approach to the sentence severity even though its contained within a guidance document.

I suggest;

1. The class system for offences is fully reviewed and improved.
2. Possibly change the "Class" system to a "Points" system where consistent re-offenders may be encouraged to change. This may make para 2.8 in the above link longer but more defined.
3. Get rid of lawyers
4. Allow officials to write a report and take into account what they may see on video that was missed at the moment.
6. Based on points - the offender gets a fixed number of games suspension and a fixed but high financial penalty - which must not be covered by the club - but by the offender, deducted on payslip at source.

This may mean para 2.10 in the link above having significant increases and more detail.

There will be errors in this system - but its only a start - feel free to improve it.

However, if it is clear what the PENALTY will be BEFORE an attempt is made to stick elbow into jaw at pace - there is no need for it to be so personal as it seems to be on this forum - is there?

If you look at the information published on the RFL Disciplinary web site - we are not far off. Off course we are not party to all thats said - but with some more tweaking it can improve.







#2 Wendall

Wendall
  • Banned
  • 6,758 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 03:35 PM

The accusations of favouritism now are similar to those in the 80's when Wigan were the only full time club and Morris Lindsey was at the peak of his influence.

Back then things were way more biased in favour of Wigan than now in 2010.

We have moved forwards as a sport.





#3 Errol Stock

Errol Stock
  • Coach
  • 486 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 03:45 PM

QUOTE (Wendall @ Aug 4 2010, 04:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The accusations of favouritism now are similar to those in the 80's when Wigan were the only full time club and Morris Lindsey was at the peak of his influence.

Back then things were way more biased in favour of Wigan than now in 2010.

We have moved forwards as a sport.


Totally agree, as a sport we have made fantastic steps forward and I would hope that now in 2010 there is no bias in favour of any club blink.gif

I confess to not realising just how much info is published on the web about the Disciplinary Process until I composed the post!

However, it still hasn't stopped the chuntering and a review may not go amiss..

#4 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,284 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 03:50 PM

Ablett was given the MAXIMUM punishment allowed as laid down by the RFL disciplinary committee, so what is the problem,or are you advocating a life ban for his challenge and his challenge alone. Players from every club get away with far worse challenges week in, week out.
Once you have tasted excellence,you cannot go back to mediocrity.

#5 Errol Stock

Errol Stock
  • Coach
  • 486 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 03:55 PM

QUOTE (terrywebbisgod @ Aug 4 2010, 04:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Players from every club get away with far worse challenges week in, week out.


Exactly what I want to end...

"However, if it is clear what the PENALTY will be BEFORE an attempt is made to stick elbow into jaw at pace - there is no need for it to be so personal as it seems to be on this forum - is there?"

Here I failed to say personal and club - not digging at a player or a club, I have not mentioned either, trying to improve what we have..


#6 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,284 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 03:58 PM

My point being a Leeds player gets a ban and now the disciplinary procedure needs looking at because he didn't get a long enough sentence(in the eyes of some people), stuff like this is never brought up when players form other clubs get sentenced(or not, in some cases)
Once you have tasted excellence,you cannot go back to mediocrity.

#7 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,654 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 04:04 PM

QUOTE (terrywebbisgod @ Aug 4 2010, 04:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My point being a Leeds player gets a ban and now the disciplinary procedure needs looking at because he didn't get a long enough sentence(in the eyes of some people), stuff like this is never brought up when players form other clubs get sentenced(or not, in some cases)

Er, yes they do. I can think of at least two others from this season, O'Loughlin & Morley!
"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#8 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,284 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 04:04 PM

QUOTE (Griff9of13 @ Aug 4 2010, 05:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Er, yes they do. I can think of at least two others from this season, O'Loughlin & Morley!

Maybe not to this extent though.
Once you have tasted excellence,you cannot go back to mediocrity.

#9 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,088 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 04:16 PM

Our disciplinary procedures are the envy of and copied by many other sports.

It avoids legal challenges and its rare that you here clubs whinging about the outcome, supporters on the other hand will never be happy unless their favourite villain is hung drawn and quatered on the centre spot of whichever stadium it is they frequent for what to others is little more than minor push against their own player.

There is nothing wrong with the disciplinary as it functions, just because you don't like an outcome doesn't make it wrong.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#10 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,284 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 04:17 PM

QUOTE (Padge @ Aug 4 2010, 05:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Our disciplinary procedures are the envy of and copied by many other sports.

It avoids legal challenges and its rare that you here clubs whinging about the outcome, supporters on the other hand will never be happy unless their favourite villain is hung drawn and quatered on the centre spot of whichever stadium it is they frequent for what to others is little more than minor push against their own player.

There is nothing wrong with the disciplinary as it functions, just because you don't like an outcome doesn't make it wrong.

Spot on.
Once you have tasted excellence,you cannot go back to mediocrity.

#11 indomitable

indomitable
  • Coach
  • 292 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 04:57 PM

QUOTE (terrywebbisgod @ Aug 4 2010, 05:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Spot on.

It reminds me of the conspiracory theories, you can make out a case to support the wildest theory's and it is hard to disprove them. The system works well, and the only ones who complain are the supporters who are directly effected. However we may criticise the management of RL I certainly don't believe that bias is given to individual supporters, and despite one or two weird decisions lately by some referees, the placing on report soon ensures justice is done

#12 amh

amh
  • Moderator
  • 11,085 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 05:33 PM

QUOTE (terrywebbisgod @ Aug 4 2010, 05:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Spot on.


Agreed

Whilst I do not suffer fools gladly, I will always gladly make fools suffer

A man is getting along on the road of wisdom when he realises that his opinion is just an opinion


#13 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,660 posts

Posted 04 August 2010 - 05:58 PM

Without any club bias here from the incidents that have been referred to the most :

Ablett on Tomkins - 3 games not sufficient a tariiff of 4 to 6 is required. I can't see where a 3 game one is the max tariff allowed. If it was Championship club then I just couldn't see a player getting 3 games for the same.
J Tomkins on Myler - at last 1 game and extra penalty in front of posts
Morley on Harrison(was it?) - no charge, huge legal hit
Loughlin on Robinson - the most borderline case. Can't agree between if it was an official warning or penalty or 10 mins sin bin or all 3
Carvell on Tomkins - no charge, was backing out, a word from the ref in passing


#14 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,792 posts

Posted 05 August 2010 - 08:14 AM

QUOTE (Padge @ Aug 4 2010, 05:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Our disciplinary procedures are the envy of and copied by many other sports.

It avoids legal challenges and its rare that you here clubs whinging about the outcome, supporters on the other hand will never be happy unless their favourite villain is hung drawn and quatered on the centre spot of whichever stadium it is they frequent for what to others is little more than minor push against their own player.

There is nothing wrong with the disciplinary as it functions, just because you don't like an outcome doesn't make it wrong.

Absolutely agree, and I must admit, after reading the OP a couple of times, I'm still not finding what the issue is...

#15 Bulliac

Bulliac
  • Coach
  • 2,686 posts

Posted 05 August 2010 - 09:36 AM

QUOTE (terrywebbisgod @ Aug 4 2010, 04:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Ablett was given the MAXIMUM punishment allowed as laid down by the RFL disciplinary committee, so what is the problem,or are you advocating a life ban for his challenge and his challenge alone. Players from every club get away with far worse challenges week in, week out.

No they don't Terry. For sure things are missed, no-one could deny that, and very occasionally something as bad as Ablett's tackle might be missed, but absolutely not every week.

FWIW, imo Ablett's tackle was a bad one, having said that, Ablett isn't a player who goes out and commits this kind of foul every week and so I would be prepared to accept that it wasn't deliberate (I've not read the official report) so I feel the three matches and fine is fair reflection of what occurred. I am a little surprised that he's appealing though.

No team is an island.........................................

http://www.flickr.co...s/31337109@N03/

#16 Errol Stock

Errol Stock
  • Coach
  • 486 posts

Posted 05 August 2010 - 10:27 AM

What I am trying to say is nothing to do with Leeds or Ablett.

Its only because that incident is freshest in mind that it keeps appearing right now.

There have been similar controversial incidents in the past and there will be more in the future..

Each time we get one - we get the same comparisons and complaints about inconsistencies.

All I am suggesting is a review of what we have to see if it may be improved.


#17 tim2

tim2
  • Coach
  • 8,307 posts

Posted 05 August 2010 - 10:30 AM

QUOTE (shaun mc @ Aug 4 2010, 06:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Without any club bias here from the incidents that have been referred to the most :

Ablett on Tomkins - If it was Championship club then I just couldn't see a player getting 3 games for the same.


Haggerty on Barlow in the Sheffield v Widnes game was worse. They added a game to the maximum to account for the severity.

http://www.therfl.co...tem.php?id=1678

Barlow is now headed to the disciplinary himself for his actions against Widnes in the TV game last week for his new club Halifax dry.gif
North Derbyshire Chargers - join the stampede

Marathon in 2014 - the hard work starts now

#18 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,088 posts

Posted 05 August 2010 - 04:03 PM

QUOTE (Errol Stock @ Aug 5 2010, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What I am trying to say is nothing to do with Leeds or Ablett.

Its only because that incident is freshest in mind that it keeps appearing right now.

There have been similar controversial incidents in the past and there will be more in the future..

Each time we get one - we get the same comparisons and complaints about inconsistencies.

All I am suggesting is a review of what we have to see if it may be improved.


The only controvesy is blown up by supporters.

Supporters of the culprits team will defend their player and claim any punishment is over the top.

Supporters of the victims team will want maximum retribution and then some more

Both sets of supporters will see it as contraversial whatever the outcome.

You can fiddle with the system all you want but supporters on from one side or the other or even both sides will still scream the outcome is unfair.

The present system is based on our legal system to ensure fairness and to prevent clubs making legal challenges, punishment is based on a tariff system as guidelines, the operative word being guidlines. Remove a lot of the protections that ensure players are treated fairly and allowed a fair defence and you will soon see clubs threatening legal action over decisions.

Supporters will always think they know better, they always have, I've got news for them they don't.


Footnote. A lot of generalisations in this post, I know some supporters are more open and fair minded.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users