So according to the RFL it is quite alright for a Saints player to smack someone in the face - that is a truly appalling decision.



Here how they see it -



"Player intentionally has a jab at the Wakefield player and as such is guilty of misconduct; however the Panel are giving him the benefit of the doubt that contact with the eye is accidental and as such consider that it is appropriate to deal with this matter by way of a caution"

Quote IngsRoader="IngsRoader"So according to the RFL it is quite alright for a Saints player to smack someone in the face - that is a truly appalling decision. Here how they see it - "Player intentionally has a jab at the Wakefield player and as such is guilty of misconduct; however the Panel are giving him the benefit of the doubt that contact with the eye is accidental and as such consider that it is appropriate to deal with this matter by way of a caution" '" Nowt up with the soft 5hite www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/inju ... 05926.html

Quote IngsRoader="IngsRoader"So according to the RFL it is quite alright for a Saints player to smack someone in the face - that is a truly appalling decision. Here how they see it - "Player intentionally has a jab at the Wakefield player and as such is guilty of misconduct; however the Panel are giving him the benefit of the doubt that contact with the eye is accidental and as such consider that it is appropriate to deal with this matter by way of a caution" '" Nowt up with the soft 5hite www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/inju ... 05926.html

Intentional and therefore guilty of misconduct but accidental that he went for the eye. What was he aiming for the floor? Or is it okay to threw a punch at someone's head now!



It's not this one particular case that grates on me it's the perceived biased towards a couple of teams/players which still seems to exist. Take Peacock at Leeds for instance and then compare with the bans handed out for the Quins v Catalan game last season.

The RFL are getting worse by the decision

Lately players seem to be getting away with alot. I think we need to mke the game more attractable to new players and their parents. Surely the RFL's decisions in the last few weeks cannot be reassuring the parents of their child's safety?

Least they got the Demetriou one correct which was obvious to see it was a fend that rose to the face.



I do wonder if it is only Fakir that gets a ban from the clowns as he i think is one of the only players to get a ban (other than howell) in super league this year. Just sad its going to take a serious injury to a player for them to realise imo

Maurie got a ban early in the season for a "chicken wing" tackle.



But there does seem to have been a lot less bans handed out this season, but I certainly don't think the game has become any "cleaner" to lead to that

Quote Rommel="Rommel"Nowt up with the soft 5hite www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/inju ... 05926.html'" Whilst you are a real tough guy or are you as I suspect a gobsh*te ponce.

Quote Rommel="Rommel"Nowt up with the soft 5hite www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/inju ... 05926.html'" Whilst you are a real tough guy or are you as I suspect a gobsh*te ponce.

I expect no less from the bunch of clowns

I've no problem with that decision at all.



Had the injury been a bad one though I would have expected a ban.

No surprise about what Cunningham did and no surprise about the rfl decision. It's rugby league get on with it.