New disciplinary system (Merged Threads)

[marklaspalmas]

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/the-99-super-league-players-starting-2025-with-disciplinary-points-including-13-from-hull-fc

99 players with points rolling over from 2024.

Hopefully they'll do a list of Championship players too.

[Loiner]

On 15/01/2025 at 07:27, Damien said:

 

 

Why should players carry points from last season? Surely it's a case of new broom sweeps clean. Every player should have a clean sheet.

[The Phantom Horseman]

10 minutes ago, Loiner said:

Why should players carry points from last season? Surely it's a case of new broom sweeps clean. Every player should have a clean sheet.

So a player who, say, gets a Grade E for deliberate contact to the head in the first game of the season in January/February should carry that all the way through the year and receive extra punishment if he offends 25 games later in September, but a player who commits the same offense in the final game of the season in October has it expunged from his record once his ban has passed? Surely not.

Yes, a couple of coaches have spoken out about this (Noble & Burgess), but they seem ignorant of the fact that this is actually a reduction in how long a player's previous offences last on his record in terms of future suspensions.

Previously, if a player had three offences in the last 24 months (including one in the last 12 months) OR if they had just one Grade C or above sanction in the past 24 months, that resulted in them receiving a punishment at the higher end of the grading scale, which regularly resulted in players getting 2 games rather than 1, 3 rather than 2 etc. So it's not anything like as big a change as the coaches are making out.

It's worth pointing out that the new system is more severe on habitual offenders, but also more lenient on players with "clean" records - for instance a player found guilty of a Grade C charge now won't get a ban at all if he didn't have any previous offences in the last 12 months.

On the other hand, the other point made by Burgess, about the lack of information coming out from the RFL (who I believe STILL haven't published anything about the new guidelines, or even acknowledged them) is 100% valid, there's no way coaches etc should be finding this out by reading it online, especially when the first source to publish them was a League 1 club.

[Dave T]

4 hours ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

So a player who, say, gets a Grade E for deliberate contact to the head in the first game of the season in January/February should carry that all the way through the year and receive extra punishment if he offends 25 games later in September, but a player who commits the same offense in the final game of the season in October has it expunged from his record once his ban has passed? Surely not.

Yes, a couple of coaches have spoken out about this (Noble & Burgess), but they seem ignorant of the fact that this is actually a reduction in how long a player's previous offences last on his record in terms of future suspensions.

Previously, if a player had three offences in the last 24 months (including one in the last 12 months) OR if they had just one Grade C or above sanction in the past 24 months, that resulted in them receiving a punishment at the higher end of the grading scale, which regularly resulted in players getting 2 games rather than 1, 3 rather than 2 etc. So it's not anything like as big a change as the coaches are making out.

It's worth pointing out that the new system is more severe on habitual offenders, but also more lenient on players with "clean" records - for instance a player found guilty of a Grade C charge now won't get a ban at all if he didn't have any previous offences in the last 12 months.

On the other hand, the other point made by Burgess, about the lack of information coming out from the RFL (who I believe STILL haven't published anything about the new guidelines, or even acknowledged them) is 100% valid, there's no way coaches etc should be finding this out by reading it online, especially when the first source to publish them was a League 1 club.

It would be interesting if some proper analysis was done on this as we are just seeing critics say this will lead to more bans, when I'm not sure that is necessarily the case.

As you say, clearly the comms has been rubbish here. But then the RFL also don't speak to us as customers either.

[Griff]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It would be interesting if some proper analysis was done on this as we are just seeing critics say this will lead to more bans, when I'm not sure that is necessarily the case.

As you say, clearly the comms has been rubbish here. But then the RFL also don't speak to us as customers either.

I'd be prepared to wager that, if club owners find that they're paying huge  wages to players to sit in the stand, these penalties will soon be reassessed

[dkw]

10 minutes ago, Griff said:

I'd be prepared to wager that, if club owners find that they're paying huge  wages to players to sit in the stand, these penalties will soon be reassessed

Maybe players and coaches would reassess the way they play.

[Loiner]

5 hours ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

So a player who, say, gets a Grade E for deliberate contact to the head in the first game of the season in January/February should carry that all the way through the year and receive extra punishment if he offends 25 games later in September, but a player who commits the same offense in the final game of the season in October has it expunged from his record once his ban has passed? Surely not.

Yes, a couple of coaches have spoken out about this (Noble & Burgess), but they seem ignorant of the fact that this is actually a reduction in how long a player's previous offences last on his record in terms of future suspensions.

Previously, if a player had three offences in the last 24 months (including one in the last 12 months) OR if they had just one Grade C or above sanction in the past 24 months, that resulted in them receiving a punishment at the higher end of the grading scale, which regularly resulted in players getting 2 games rather than 1, 3 rather than 2 etc. So it's not anything like as big a change as the coaches are making out.

It's worth pointing out that the new system is more severe on habitual offenders, but also more lenient on players with "clean" records - for instance a player found guilty of a Grade C charge now won't get a ban at all if he didn't have any previous offences in the last 12 months.

On the other hand, the other point made by Burgess, about the lack of information coming out from the RFL (who I believe STILL haven't published anything about the new guidelines, or even acknowledged them) is 100% valid, there's no way coaches etc should be finding this out by reading it online, especially when the first source to publish them was a League 1 club.

Yeah I get what you are saying here and tend to agree with you, what I meant was as this is new players from last season shouldn't be penalised for something they knew nothing about. By all means carry it on to future seasons.

[SUPERSTUD]

New system should mean clean slate! In criminal law offenders get dealt with and sentenced under which legislation was in place at the time of their offending even if they are arrested and convicted years down the line. As an alternative maybe we should revert to touch and pass. Let’s all now agree that the game and its administration is on its arris.

[Griff]

3 hours ago, dkw said:

Maybe players and coaches would reassess the way they play.

Maybe aye, maybe no.

[marklaspalmas]

And here we go.

Sam Burgess has a (perhaps legitimate) whine and the whole system is going to be reconsidered.

How amateurish.

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/rfl-to-reconsider-disciplinary-system-changes-as-sam-burgess-claim-challenged

[Dave T]

20 minutes ago, marklaspalmas said:

And here we go.

Sam Burgess has a (perhaps legitimate) whine and the whole system is going to be reconsidered.

How amateurish.

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/rfl-to-reconsider-disciplinary-system-changes-as-sam-burgess-claim-challenged

It's rubbish isn't it?

If we kept the old system last years incidents would count, there is no reason to wipe the slate.

Surely scenarios were run to work out the impact that would justify the change?

[marklaspalmas]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's rubbish isn't it?

If we kept the old system last years incidents would count, there is no reason to wipe the slate.

Surely scenarios were run to work out the impact that would justify the change?

Yes. You say 'surely' but to me it's obvious they weren't.

The point about communication between the RFL and clubs is alarming. Of the two, Burgess's version sounds the more likely.

[Dave T]

15 minutes ago, marklaspalmas said:

Yes. You say 'surely' but to me it's obvious they weren't.

The point about communication between the RFL and clubs is alarming. Of the two, Burgess's version sounds the more likely.

I'm not sure about that. Burgess has been liberal with the truth before, particularly around foul play and disciplinary. 

I like him as our manager, but he has this in him.

[JohnM]

Where does the RFL say the whole system is going to be reconsidered?

If what LRL has written is true

-the clubs knew about it. 

- the clubs were consulted

- the clubs agreed.

It would've in my view been right for the RFL etc to announce it formally and properly, which would have stopped a dissident club from stirring.

As for Burgess or any other head coach expressing a view...well, they've better things to focus on so close to the start of the season. Let the clubs' CEOs , MDs handle it.

[marklaspalmas]

17 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Where does the RFL say the whole system is going to be reconsidered?

If what LRL has written is true

-the clubs knew about it. 

- the clubs were consulted

- the clubs agreed.

It would've in my view been right for the RFL etc to announce it formally and properly, which would have stopped a dissident club from stirring.

As for Burgess or any other head coach expressing a view...well, they've better things to focus on so close to the start of the season. Let the clubs' CEOs , MDs handle it.

Quote

Love Rugby League has covered the changes in significant detail, with more below about the finer points of the system. However, there could now be a dramatic pull-back from the governing body. They have said, in a statement issued to Love Rugby League, that while there is support for the ‘broad direction of travel’, they will reconsider the prospect of applying 2024 charges to a players’ record, meaning it is now possible everyone could start on zero points.

Seems quite clear in the link that it's not just about Sam Burgess

[JohnM]

1 minute ago, marklaspalmas said:

Seems quite clear in the link that it's not just about Sam Burgess

How does that translate to you saying "the whole system is going to be reconsidered"

[Old Cougar]

Although we might have broken the news first, with Brad England being banned 3 games (for accidentally brushing the referee who, whilst running backwards, sidestepped into Brad) why not check the number of Super League players who face longer bans after having their previous records carried forward? Then pass comment!

Check Sam Burgess' comments:

Warrington Wolves boss Sam Burgess has revealed he found out about the changes to the disciplinary process for 2025 via the media, having had no part in the discussions surrounding them.

 

To make matters worse for top-flight clubs, there are 99 Super League players who begin the campaign with points against their name which have been carried over from last year.

Eight of those players belong to Warrington – with Paul Vaughan (8) and James Harrison (6) already in particular danger of copping a mammoth ban whenever their first offence in 2025 comes, regardless of how severe that offence is.

Speaking to the media – including LoveRugbyLeague – at the Wolves’ pre-season media day on Thursday afternoon, Burgess detailed just how little knowledge he had of the new disciplinary process.

With a friendly against Widnes Vikings coming up on Friday evening, Burgess said: “I was sent that this morning, so no (I had no input).

“I’m just telling the truth – we're three weeks out from the season and I was told about it this morning. There’s a lot of frustrating stuff.

“I think the system looks alright from what I’ve seen of it, but nothing should carry over. It’s a new season, so how does that work?

“All of the players have paid the price for their past indiscretions, so let’s move on. If we’re having a new system, just start it now.”

Having paid the price for their previous indiscretions, as Sam Burgess says: Start with a 'Clean Slate'!

[marklaspalmas]

10 minutes ago, JohnM said:

How does that translate to you saying "the whole system is going to be reconsidered"

Pedantry alert. Delete my hyperbolic use of the word whole. In my defence to this heinous exaggeration,  I had been reading LRL articles previous to posting.

The whole thing (see what i did there) has been introduced, explained, considered and presented by the RFL in an ad hoc, amateurish way.

IMO

[JohnM]

And in turn, IMO of course, I don't see it that way. I prefer the "official" version, rather than that of a coach who appears to have been asleep at the wheel (rather than him being "economical with the verité"  If indeed the RFL are going to look again at the way it is being introduced, then so be it. To me that puts the RFL in a better light than Burgess, since they did introduce, explain, consider and present it. 

IMO

Edited January 18 by JohnM

[Griff]

2 hours ago, marklaspalmas said:

Pedantry alert. Delete my hyperbolic use of the word whole. In my defence to this heinous exaggeration,  I had been reading LRL articles previous to posting.

The whole thing (see what i did there) has been introduced, explained, considered and presented by the RFL in an ad hoc, amateurish way.

IMO

I think you're right, Mark.  The whole system will be reconsidered.  Doesn't mean that the whole system will be changed.

My first thought was "there's going to be a lot more suspensions than last year".  

[marklaspalmas]

59 minutes ago, JohnM said:

And in turn, IMO of course, I don't see it that way. I prefer the "official" version, rather than that of a coach who appears to have been asleep at the wheel (rather than him being "economical with the verité"  If indeed the RFL are going to look again at the way it is being introduced, then so be it. To me that puts the RFL in a better light than Burgess, since they did introduce, explain, consider and present it. 

IMO

When and how did the fans, ie the people who fund rugby league to a large extent, find out?

This isn't about Burgess mouthing off. It seems to have caught everyone, except possibly, club officials (all of whom bar Keighley chose not to share the info) off guard.

If it is, in the RFL's own words already being reconsidered before the season has even started, then I would suggest, again IMO, that the whole process was not at all properly considered before introduction. You'll have to show me where the RFL explained & presented all this to the fans before Keighley mentioned it.

[Griff]

Suddenly I'm wondering whether some embargo has been broken.

[Dave T]

9 hours ago, Old Cougar said:

Although we might have broken the news first, with Brad England being banned 3 games (for accidentally brushing the referee who, whilst running backwards, sidestepped into Brad) why not check the number of Super League players who face longer bans after having their previous records carried forward? Then pass comment!

Check Sam Burgess' comments:

Warrington Wolves boss Sam Burgess has revealed he found out about the changes to the disciplinary process for 2025 via the media, having had no part in the discussions surrounding them.

 

To make matters worse for top-flight clubs, there are 99 Super League players who begin the campaign with points against their name which have been carried over from last year.

Eight of those players belong to Warrington – with Paul Vaughan (8) and James Harrison (6) already in particular danger of copping a mammoth ban whenever their first offence in 2025 comes, regardless of how severe that offence is.

Speaking to the media – including LoveRugbyLeague – at the Wolves’ pre-season media day on Thursday afternoon, Burgess detailed just how little knowledge he had of the new disciplinary process.

With a friendly against Widnes Vikings coming up on Friday evening, Burgess said: “I was sent that this morning, so no (I had no input).

“I’m just telling the truth – we're three weeks out from the season and I was told about it this morning. There’s a lot of frustrating stuff.

“I think the system looks alright from what I’ve seen of it, but nothing should carry over. It’s a new season, so how does that work?

“All of the players have paid the price for their past indiscretions, so let’s move on. If we’re having a new system, just start it now.”

Having paid the price for their previous indiscretions, as Sam Burgess says: Start with a 'Clean Slate'!

The article you've quoted is really poor.

They say Harrison at Wire is in danger of a mammoth ban when he next offends as he is on 6 points. If he commits an offence under grade A,B or C, he will get a 1 match ban. If he gets a grade D he gets 2 matches, which is lower than last year's 2-3 matches.

So it's just blatantly wrong to say he will get a mammoth ban with his first offence of 2025. They also don't clarify that this would occur up to July when 2024 fall off his record.

We just don't seem to be able to talk about things sensibly in RL, nobody appears to want to look into things properly, just get headlines and claim mammoth bans are coming, when it just doesn't look like that's the case.

There does appear to be a challenge around cumulative points and whether it works well, but if the aim is to reduce repeat offenders, then maybe it's absolutely right.

But Burgess didn't want Vaughan sent off for a bad tackle to the head, he didn't want him banned, and now he doesn't want it staying on his record. The RFL need to do better work so that when a coach tries it on they don't crumble.

Edited January 18 by Dave T