[Kosh]

: Wed Feb 18, 2009 3:36 pm  

rover49 wrote:

It certainly shows that in the case of some clubs the video panel are a bit 'keen', the figures you show clearly show this.

Not really. The number of referrals is linked to the number of incidents, pure and simple. The video panel only decides whether the incident needs to be looked at by the judiciary, not how bad any given incident may be.

Re: RFL disciplinary strikes again : Wed Feb 18, 2009 3:47 pm  

rover49 wrote:

He's right Chev Walker was charged with striking his opponent with his forearm, the Leeds player had his forearm viciously attacked by his opponents chin

Have you seen the Bailey incident? Do you know, as fact, that there was any contact between his forearm/elbow and his opponents head? The comments of the disciplinary panel suggest not. Hence the difference in sentence.

Re: RFL disciplinary strikes again : Wed Feb 18, 2009 3:53 pm  

Wembley '83 wrote:

Have you seen the Bailey incident? Do you know, as fact, that there was any contact between his forearm/elbow and his opponents head? The comments of the disciplinary panel suggest not. Hence the difference in sentence.

Oh, ignore them, FFS, they're only in possession of the full facts. It's much more fun to rant on a forum in complete ignorance of that sort of irritating factual stuff.