christopher wrote:But again the appeal judiciary stated that it was only because catkin reacted and changed his position that the arm didn't go out of 'normal range'.

You put your arm where Atkins was and then think that there is someone twisting it - normal range of motion or not it could injure you.

It was a clear bit of fowl play that nobody seem to question when given a ban. well apart from Saints that is. The way it has subsequently been handled by the RFL is an absolute farce. For example there's no actual ruling, what happened did it get downgraded to a grade A, did the whole thing get thrown out because the appeal was flawed, I don't know why Saints fans are getting al uppity people are having a go at the RFL not Saints.

YosemiteSam wrote:It was a chicken wing tackle. Naturally.

Rommel wrote:Not going will stop you watching the great player Knowles is. Don't cut your nose of to spite your face.

The Reaper wrote:The verdict was he wasn't guilty of the charge he was faced with, which is why the entire ban got overturned

Seth wrote:So Reaper, youre ok with this becoming part of the game now the precedent is set?

christopher wrote:So a 2 match ban just got wiped out to 0 because a third opinion ruled that the opinion of the ref, video ref, MRP and another appeal panel was all incorrect.

You don't think that's incompetence by the RFL?

Seth wrote:So Reaper, youre ok with this becoming part of the game now the precedent is set?