Liam watts.

[Spanishtiger]

The point has to be the glaring inconsistencies between similar incidents. It appears that Mr Taylor committed 3 offences that were penalty sufficient whereas poor ol Mr Watts committed one, was despatched to the sin bin for his troubles, and received a 1 match suspension.

Having watched all the games this season many players have escaped the wrath of the disciplinary Committee for worse so why pick on Watts?

[nottinghamtiger]

The point has to be the glaring inconsistencies between similar incidents. It appears that Mr Taylor committed 3 offences that were penalty sufficient whereas poor ol Mr Watts committed one, was despatched to the sin bin for his troubles, and received a 1 match suspension.

Having watched all the games this season many players have escaped the wrath of the disciplinary Committee for worse so why pick on Watts?

The glaring inconsistency is exactly the reason you don’t risk an appeal.

[Spanishtiger]

Already said that I agree with you Notts

[nottinghamtiger]

Already said that I agree with you Notts

Sorry, didn’t clock the username!

[Spanishtiger]

But surely somebody somewhere has to take a stance against this? How long can we continue with one rule for the rich and another for the rest?

Granted Watts didn't help his case with a daft tweet, but are you eeriously saying that Watts running into Taylor was worse than Mossop mullering Richardson the week before (NFA)?

[nottinghamtiger]

But surely somebody somewhere has to take a stance against this? How long can we continue with one rule for the rich and another for the rest?

Granted Watts didn't help his case with a daft tweet, but are you eeriously saying that Watts running into Taylor was worse than Mossop mullering Richardson the week before (NFA)?

No, I absolutely agree that there is inconsistency.

As for how long we can continue with one rule for the rich and another for the rest, I’m afraid it’s how it is and how it always will be.
Whenever you have a situation that relies on strength of argument, those with money will be able to pay those who are the best at making and communicating a convincing argument.

[westerbeast73]

Cas always get rough treatment from the RFL and referees alike. Would have thought people on here would be used to it by now as it's happened for Years.

[Spanishtiger]

Sadly I agree with both the last two posts

[Abdul Mohammed]

Paul Cullen on the judiciary panel? One of the biggest cheap shot merchants back in the day. Bloody hell sweet baby Jesus

[old cas lass]

Sounds like Liam is stamping his feet outside.

[gateman]

would the panel have more credabiity if the members were selected from a lower division ??

[covid tiger]

Paul Cullen on the judiciary panel? One of the biggest cheap shot merchants back in the day. Bloody hell sweet baby Jesus

Now misses Warrington game.. Cullen Warrington link....

[tykeneil]

Nothing suprises me these days at RFL and especially the disciplinary

To use the word "FRIVILOUS" is appalling and suggests they never even looked at it again. Not great on diplomacy.

Also noted on the original disciplinary minutes in Wigan game they referred to Harry Smith as Matty Smith - so observation and accuracy not their strong point

[barking]

Did we expect anything else? We should appeal based on Lee Mossop gets NFA for the exact same thing the previous week.

Appeal and they will raise it to 2 games, they never admit to being wrong

Told ya so

These [REMOVED] at the RFL have never favoured Cas so the extra game was inevitable

[nottinghamtiger]

Paul Cullen on the judiciary panel? One of the biggest cheap shot merchants back in the day. Bloody hell sweet baby Jesus

Now misses Warrington game.. Cullen Warrington link....

Nobody made the club appeal.

[nottinghamtiger]

Did we expect anything else? We should appeal based on Lee Mossop gets NFA for the exact same thing the previous week.

Appeal and they will raise it to 2 games, they never admit to being wrong

Told ya so

These [REMOVED] at the RFL have never favoured Cas so the extra game was inevitable

Which makes appealing a poor decision.

[Tamworth Tiger]

Absolutely

[derbystiger]

It’s not often I’m in 100% agreement with you Notts but, yep, very poor decision. We all knew the outcome

[FIat Capper]

It’s not often I’m in 100% agreement with you Notts but, yep, very poor decision. We all knew the outcome

I am aware that on many previous occasions an appeal has resulted in an increased ban but more often than not it's because the original ban was reduced for the likes of a previously good disciplinary record and appealing ruins that record.

But, on this occasion, it appears his ban has been increased because the panel feel Watts has been "frivolous".

For Christ's sake, there's blokes knocking hell out of each other every game and you ban someone for being frivolous.

[tigerfeat]

I can just see Cullen and one or two others on the panel strutting around thinking there Gods gift to Rugby League
Your never going to get fairness in RL from top to bottom it's biased or corrupt and as been for a long time