11 replies to this topic

[davo99]

It's bad enough stuff being let go completely (already done to death) but when someone does actually get banned, they turn up, trot out some 'I shouldn't banned coz I'm a good lad really', and they're instantly let off.

What's the point???

[Allan Marsden]

There is no point and any club / player that does not appeal wants certifying. The disciplinary system does not make the job of match officials any easier. Rather, it makes it harder. You only have to look at the positive impact Jim Comans had upon the NRL to see the benefit of a tough stance.

[Blind side johnny]

There is no point and any club / player that does not appeal wants certifying. The disciplinary system does not make the job of match officials any easier. Rather, it makes it harder. You only have to look at the positive impact Jim Comans had upon the NRL to see the benefit of a tough stance.

Rubbish!

If you are unsuccessful with an appeal then you are likely to get the ban extended and the fine increased.

It is possible for any tribunal/court of law to get their decisions wrong you know - that's why they have appeal panels.

[bird]

Out of interest, anybody know how much it costs to appeal?

[davo99]

Rubbish!

If you are unsuccessful with an appeal then you are likely to get the ban extended and the fine increased.

It is possible for any tribunal/court of law to get their decisions wrong you know - that's why they have appeal panels.

I'd agree that that's how it used to be - you appealed, still guilty, extra 2 games for your cheek.

The last couple though, the offenders have still been found guilty of the original offence and just had the bans dropped.

[indomitable]

It appears your ban remains if not involved in a vital cup match, but now we have seen two recent removal of bans despite the fine standing.
Not a very good message to send out, and I recall Sykes of the Bulls putting his hand up saying he was guilty of a 'spear' tackle earlier in the season and taking the fine and suspension without complaint. The disciplinary committee are sending out a poor message, and I cannot think of any cases particularly in SL, where the punishment has been increased following a unsuccessful appeal.

[Brigg Rover]

The popular one that I have seen this year is 1 game ban plus £300 fine. Appeal then turned into 0 game ban and £500 fine so it looks to me that a game is worth £200 to the appeals committee. Are they on a % do you think?

[Allan Marsden]

Rubbish!

If you are unsuccessful with an appeal then you are likely to get the ban extended and the fine increased.

It is possible for any tribunal/court of law to get their decisions wrong you know - that's why they have appeal panels.

How often does an unsuccessful appeal result in an extended ban so if you want to shout rubbish get your argument straight and supported with information.

[adelwire]

When I went to Bayhorse tonight someone was telling me who was on the disciplinary committee. Do we actually know this info in the public domain?

[Allan Marsden]

When I went to Bayhorse tonight someone was telling me who was on the disciplinary committee. Do we actually know this info in the public domain?

Does it not change though fairly regularly. I believe Colin Clarke was on it for the Wigan v Leeds cases.

[amh]

When I went to Bayhorse tonight someone was telling me who was on the disciplinary committee. Do we actually know this info in the public domain?

rfl info

[southstand loiner]

a wonderful thing was the 3 man panel that decided buderus deserved a 1 match ban in effect next weeks game against wigan had 2 exwigan players on it so he got a 1 match ban.
on appeal the 3 man panel had no exwigan players on it but had 1 exleeds player on it result no ban.

all seems perfectly fair to me.