mdean wrote:
I think like most people I have no real objection to 2 match bans for punching in retalliation, that seems perfectly logical to me that players do not make their own justice on the field.
I wasn't at the hearing either, so it is not clear what eveidence and arguments were put forward - for instance if the offence was then aggrevated by abusing the referee or match comissioner after the game, then that too could well have a bearing and should.
Again, no objection to any of the above. I think the appeal will be based on the fact that without any additional circumstances, that it is not in keeping with the sanctions of similar events. As someone who has spent a lot of time in various capacities around the sport and someone who, I am not ashamed to admit detests punch ups, I would like to see harsh sanctions, becuase the game is hard enough, tough and played by tough people without allowing punching and brawls..........
BUT - it has to be consistently applied and in this case looking at other recent offences, it has not been. If I was Castleford, I might be tempted to contact the RFL and instead of allowing Rangi to play this week pending appeal, we ask them to allow us to "suspend" Rangi this week pending appeal, showing our intentions we do not condone the activity but contest the sanction.
That way if the ban is reduced to 1 game, he will have served it.
Happy to be told I am wrong, a clown and biased, but my view is equal to those already shared!
Good post there MD. I have just seen the incident again and Chase throws two punches in reaction to being hit whilst on the floor. Even allowing for the retaliatory circumstances, if the RFL were doing their job properly, fairly and even handedly, you could accept 2 matches in the name of trying to clean the game up.
However they are not applying even handedness and anything like consistency and in comparison with many other offences this season it is in fact very harsh. There have been quite a few cases that have been worse and either got just one match or let off completely. Furthermore many of these did not even have mitigating / retaliatory circumstances as an excuse. If some of these had got say, 4 matches then you could have accepted the 2 matches.
This is just one reason why so many fans within the game have such a poor opinion of the RFL and get their backs up with them. And that low opinion is unfortunately not just confined to the corridors of our sport itself, it is an opinion that proliferates within the sporting world in general. They just change the laws and punishments to suit whoever it affects, with a bloody minded attitude.
They so blatantly operate the one law for one and one law for another stance, without as much blinking an eyelid.
