No is isn’t. It’s the credibility of JC and the proven untruthful nature from JMcG in the first disciplinary, in addition, to the ‘one word against another’.

If JMcG had told the whole truth in the first discipline, he may have had a chance with ‘his word against mine’ in the second hearing, but he hadn’t.

So you must take the credibility of Charnley as reason above doubt against McGuire.

I agree with you that Powell and the coaching staff should do what they can to protect players, with them being able to appropriately handle flash points. However, to start leaving them out from specific games, is only going to encourage other teams, besides Catalans and Leigh in your post, to wind up these players and get them to react. We don't want to highlight to any opposition a perception of an individual's weakness.

I do think that in these 2 individual circumstances. It would be appropriate to have left out in these situations given the gravity and severity of the circumstances,

I for 1 minute am not saying we should be dropping players out of weakness of winding players up...

i mean... it seems like thats exactly what you're saying

If we drop a player where there may be flashpoints because they has no self control whatsoever and pick up lengthy bans, then what's the point of having that player in the first place? Fully back the club on this one, he served a 7 game ban for mouthing off and then picked up another for the same thing. Whether the judiciary panel were harsh or not, the precedent had been set, to get a ban for the same offence against the same player having already cost us for 7 games is just absolutely ridiculous.

Don’t know why McGuire didn’t appeal say he has Tourette’s, and then told them all to ‘feck off!’, as further evidence?