More disciplinary controversy

[Cheadle Leyther]

How about this as another example of the big team being favoured- 3 Wigan players have been banned for one match each. But guess what- there is a Wigan reserve match next week so they can all play in their semi- final. Meanwhile one of our best players Tom Amone is also banned for 1 game and is out of our semi final. This comes after our disallowed try on Friday when all the Sky commentators said it was a try. Additionally wire prop Paul Vaughn got 4 matches for merely helping a player to get up. Yet French gets 1 match for touching a referee, which is usually treated as a heinous crime. Somehow I don’t think Wigan wii n be appealing!!

[GUBRATS]

7 minutes ago, Cheadle Leyther said:

How about this as another example of the big team being favoured- 3 Wigan players have been banned for one match each. But guess what- there is a Wigan reserve match next week so they can all play in their semi- final. Meanwhile one of our best players Tom Amone is also banned for 1 game and is out of our semi final. This comes after our disallowed try on Friday when all the Sky commentators said it was a try. Additionally wire prop Paul Vaughn got 4 matches for merely helping a player to get up. Yet French gets 1 match for touching a referee, which is usually treated as a heinous crime. Somehow I don’t think Wigan wii n be appealing!!

Makes it all a bit pointless doesn't it ? 

From Tom's POV we appeal 

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by GUBRATS

[Dunbar]

I am really not a fan of using reserve team games to eat up a ban.  If a ban results from a first team game then you should miss that number of first team games.

[sam4731]

These loopholes seem depressingly easy to close too

[Wollo Wollo Wayoo]

Lucky Wigan.

 

Noticed that HKR's Sam Luckley had been charged with biting.  Don't remember that being highlighted during the game.  In good typical Wakey fashion we "don't want to take the matter any further" 

Edited September 25, 2023 by Wollo Wollo Wayoo

[Damien]

11 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I am really not a fan of using reserve team games to eat up a ban.  If a ban results from a first team game then you should miss that number of first team games.

It's crazy that isn't the case.

[gingerjon]

13 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I am really not a fan of using reserve team games to eat up a ban.  If a ban results from a first team game then you should miss that number of first team games.

Absolutely. It's not justifiable in any sense.

[Just Browny]

I'm certain this is fine and we shouldn't be questioning it.

[WN83]

It's a joke of a loophole and should've been closed ages ago. In Wigan's defence, we've not benefited from it before IIRC, unlike plenty of other clubs, so it's an issue that impacts all clubs and it needs sorting. I can't even complain the bans were harsh in the first place. French was plain stupid for touching the ref and Ellis put in a really lazy shoulder, that caught Reynolds high. I didn't notice the Harvie Hill incident. 

Edited September 25, 2023 by WN83

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

30 minutes ago, Wollo Wollo Wayoo said:

Lucky Wigan.

 

Noticed that HKR's Sam Luckley had been charged with biting.  Don't remember that being highlighted during the game.  In good typical Wakey fashion we "don't want to take the matter any further" 

Yes it was in the first part of the 2nd half I think, didn't know which Rovers player it was but saw the Wakey players make the claim to the ref

[sam4731]

Don't worry, still plenty of time for Wigan to get disqualified for the reserve GF. Can someone check back through reserve game videos for number of interchanges?

[Cheadle Leyther]

Can’t all 3 teams that could meet Wigan in the semi final i.e. Hull KR, Leigh and Wire appeal the ban on French is too lenient??!!

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

Yes it was in the first part of the 2nd half I think, didn't know which Rovers player it was but saw the Wakey players make the claim to the ref

The Wigan reserve games probably going to cost Rovers a GF appearance 

[Chris22]

It's evidently not some 'big club' conspiracy. Several teams have benefitted this loophole this season. 

It doesn't pass the sniff test though and the loophole will probably be closed next year.

The weekly circus we have surrounding the disciplinary, speaking more generally, doesn't help the sport.

Edited September 25, 2023 by Chris22

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Chris22 said:

It's evidently not some 'big club' conspiracy. Several teams have benefitted this loophole this season. 

It doesn't pass the sniff test though and the loophole will probably be closed next year.

The answer isn't obvious but a weekly disciplinary circus doesn't help the sport.

The answer isn't obvious ? 

Isn't it ? 

Reserve team games cannot be used for first team bans , how simple do you want it ? 

[Chris22]

7 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

The answer isn't obvious ? 

Isn't it ? 

Reserve team games cannot be used for first team bans , how simple do you want it ? 

Sorry, that is obvious yes! I was talking about the disciplinary process more widely.

[Spidey]

Bad enough it’s a thing but at this stage of the season it’s an absolute farce 

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Bad enough it’s a thing but at this stage of the season it’s an absolute farce 

If ever the oft used quote " only in RL " was relevant , this is it 

[EagleEyePie]

3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

The answer isn't obvious ? 

Isn't it ? 

Reserve team games cannot be used for first team bans , how simple do you want it ? 

Probably not that simple, as it means a fringe player could be called up to the first team, commit a really serious offence that gets them an 8+ match ban and just continue playing for the reserves for the rest of the year. Sure, they'd eventually have to serve the suspension but it would be a bad look for the sport if they were still playing the following week.

I think a smaller tweak to the rules would be enough, such as only those outside of a clubs top 25 salary capped players being able to use reserves games towards suspensions. It means those that would usually play for the reserves or even U19's would still serve their suspensions immediately.

It is of course a ridiculous loophole that should have been fixed years ago and when it happens at such a crucial time of the year it reflects badly on the RFL's disciplinary processes.

[GUBRATS]

3 minutes ago, EagleEyePie said:

Probably not that simple, as it means a fringe player could be called up to the first team, commit a really serious offence that gets them an 8+ match ban and just continue playing for the reserves for the rest of the year. Sure, they'd eventually have to serve the suspension but it would be a bad look for the sport if they were still playing the following week.

I think a smaller tweak to the rules would be enough, such as only those outside of a clubs top 25 salary capped players being able to use reserves games towards suspensions. It means those that would usually play for the reserves or even U19's would still serve their suspensions immediately.

It is of course a ridiculous loophole that should have been fixed years ago and when it happens at such a crucial time of the year it reflects badly on the RFL's disciplinary processes.

Or the club itself could stand down a player committing such a serious misdemeanour 

Does it look good for the sport that these 3 players will essentially not serve any ban ? 

Edited September 25, 2023 by GUBRATS

[north yorks trinity]

Completely agree with the majority opinion on here. We're either all geniuses or the answer was obvious all along.  Can't quite decide which.

On a related note, should a player be allowed to play for the reserves (e.g. if needing match fitness) while serving a first team ban and vice versa?

[north yorks trinity]

1 minute ago, north yorks trinity said:

Completely agree with the majority opinion on here. We're either all geniuses or the answer was obvious all along.  Can't quite decide which.

On a related note, should a player be allowed to play for the reserves (e.g. if needing match fitness) while serving a first team ban and vice versa?

Posted at the same time as the previous posts. OK so I'm not a genius after all and I think EagleEyePie has the best idea.

[GUBRATS]

3 minutes ago, north yorks trinity said:

Completely agree with the majority opinion on here. We're either all geniuses or the answer was obvious all along.  Can't quite decide which.

On a related note, should a player be allowed to play for the reserves (e.g. if needing match fitness) while serving a first team ban and vice versa?

No , don't commit foul play , simple as 

[Dave T]

28 minutes ago, Chris22 said:

It's evidently not some 'big club' conspiracy. Several teams have benefitted this loophole this season. 

It doesn't pass the sniff test though and the loophole will probably be closed next year.

The weekly circus we have surrounding the disciplinary, speaking more generally, doesn't help the sport.

Which other clubs have benefited from this? This is usually a factor at the start of the year when somebody gets banned in a pre-season game, which I think is more reasonable, but where has this been an issue during the year? Was it around cup weekends? 

[Jinking Jimmy]

1 hour ago, Cheadle Leyther said:

How about this as another example of the big team being favoured- 3 Wigan players have been banned for one match each. But guess what- there is a Wigan reserve match next week so they can all play in their semi- final. Meanwhile one of our best players Tom Amone is also banned for 1 game and is out of our semi final. This comes after our disallowed try on Friday when all the Sky commentators said it was a try. Additionally wire prop Paul Vaughn got 4 matches for merely helping a player to get up. Yet French gets 1 match for touching a referee, which is usually treated as a heinous crime. Somehow I don’t think Wigan wii n be appealing!!

Maybe if Leigh had a reserve side they could benefit in situations like this one. As for the disallowed Leigh try, get over it and maybe discuss the disallowed Wigan try. Just because the Sky crew say it was a try doesn’t make it a try. That’s their opinion.

Re the French incident, this has happened before with, for example, St.Helens players McCarthy-Scarsbrook receiving 0 matches and 1 match and Makinson 0 matches for the same offence against a referee.

Edited September 25, 2023 by Jinking Jimmy