debaser wrote:KR to appeal according to this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 895816.stm It seems unfair that Bailey got a letter, and Walker a ban. Don't tell me that the RFL are being inconsistent.... 1 match ban upheld; http://www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=13107

debaser wrote:KR to appeal according to this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 895816.stm It seems unfair that Bailey got a letter, and Walker a ban. Don't tell me that the RFL are being inconsistent.... 1 match ban upheld; http://www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=13107

How would you want the system to be like then?

I've no idea really. Just moaning.

How about the team against who the offence was committed gets to choose which games the offendee misses? How would that work?

Match ban to be served next time teams meet?

It is strange that an incident that occurs against a team does not benefit said team when punishment is given out.

I thought that too. But what about 3, 4 match bans? That could last for several seasons.
I've always had a major gripe though with bans given while playing for the international side been served when playing for the club side.

I think the idea is to punish the offender not reward those offended against. Therefore, in theory, the match that the player misses could be a cup final. (Yes I know that we are unlikely to see this RFL ban a player from any important match but I did say theory).