RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
23 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!
WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Knowles
Re: Knowles Thu Sep 22, 2022 10:45 pm  
Re: Knowles
Thu Sep 22, 2022 10:45 pm  

User avatarHopie wrote:
Hopie User avatar
Silver RLFANS Member


Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 2:20 pm
Posts: 5289
Location: Aberdeen
Member for 21 years
In Summary:
Referee Team on the Day, bad tackle please leave the field.
MRP, bad tackle please don't come back next week either.
Appeal Board, yup i dunt want you to play eether.
2nd Appeal Board, hold on a minute, that appeal verdict doesn't make complete sense, therefore everybody is wrong and he should play after all....

The second appeal board could overturn the first appeal decision if they wished, but that would still leave the MRP decision in place and allow for a fresh re-run of the 1st appeal, more sensibly they should have said, yes there is a technical error here here, but it was not material to the decision to ban the player, and that is the correct decision which they should have upheld.
“You are playing a game of football this afternoon but more than that you are playing for England, and more even than that, you are playing for right versus wrong. You will win because you have to win. Don’t forget that message from home. England expects every one of you to do his duty.”
Re: Knowles Thu Sep 22, 2022 11:00 pm  
Re: Knowles
Thu Sep 22, 2022 11:00 pm  

User avatarwrencat1873 wrote:
wrencat1873 User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 7:28 pm
Posts: 17299
Member for 11 years
TheWarringtonWolve69 wrote:
If people actually read how Knowles got off instead of just going “grrr St Helens” they would realise that Saints were actually correct. It’s not their fault the rfl are utterly incompetent and should be glad that St Helens did what they did which may open the door for other teams to get their players off stupid bans next season


Reading it doesn't make the decision any better.
Saints bring along an "expert" who suggests that the movement of the arm was within "the normal range" but, the RFL dont have their own expert" to counter this or, take evidence from the Salford player or, their medical team. Therefore, it's not balanced, is it ? Like going to court but, the prosecution lawyers dont turn up.

The simple judgement would be, how would you feel if it was, say, Welsby or Lomax on the receiving end of that challenge ? Maybe you closed your eyes. Certainly, Roby let go of the player when he saw what his mate was doing.
Re: Knowles Thu Sep 22, 2022 11:33 pm  
Re: Knowles
Thu Sep 22, 2022 11:33 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:
Phuzzy Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:25 am
Posts: 4637
Location: Just about to go do some work!
Member for 16 years
TheWarringtonWolve69 wrote:
If people actually read how Knowles got off instead of just going “grrr St Helens” they would realise that Saints were actually correct. It’s not their fault the rfl are utterly incompetent and should be glad that St Helens did what they did which may open the door for other teams to get their players off stupid bans next season

Saints were only correct if you think the incompetent RFL/panel were correct which is basically saying you're prepared to believe a contradiction. The panel is either incompetent and Saints exploited this (as you claimed previously) or they're not and they got the decision correct. It can't be both.

The panel doesn't even understand the basic concept of "risk". They think it's a result and not a possibility. How could they possibly get the decision right if they don't even properly understand the underlying concept?
Re: Knowles Fri Sep 23, 2022 5:25 am  
Re: Knowles
Fri Sep 23, 2022 5:25 am  

Jason65 wrote:
Jason65 Cheeky half-back
Cheeky half-back

Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:38 pm
Posts: 597
Member for 2 years
TheWarringtonWolve69 wrote:
Hi mate. You’ve been quiet since “the best team in SL” got knocked out of the play offs by a team who lost more games than they won all season. You ok mate?


you still are thick arnt you,the best team wins the Gf I have said that all the time.
I am good thanks for asking and how are you I mean all of them in your head.

Been busy with work as you must be with your schoolwork mate.
Re: Knowles Fri Sep 23, 2022 5:32 am  
Re: Knowles
Fri Sep 23, 2022 5:32 am  

User avatarMild Rover wrote:
Mild Rover User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 9:49 am
Posts: 12281
Location: Leicestershire.
Member for 15 years
Hopie wrote:
In Summary:
Referee Team on the Day, bad tackle please leave the field.
MRP, bad tackle please don't come back next week either.
Appeal Board, yup i dunt want you to play eether.
2nd Appeal Board, hold on a minute, that appeal verdict doesn't make complete sense, therefore everybody is wrong and he should play after all....

The second appeal board could overturn the first appeal decision if they wished, but that would still leave the MRP decision in place and allow for a fresh re-run of the 1st appeal, more sensibly they should have said, yes there is a technical error here here, but it was not material to the decision to ban the player, and that is the correct decision which they should have upheld.


I don’t think there is necessarily even a technical error.

wrencat1873 wrote:
Reading it doesn't make the decision any better.
Saints bring along an "expert" who suggests that the movement of the arm was within "the normal range" but, the RFL dont have their own expert" to counter this or, take evidence from the Salford player or, their medical team. Therefore, it's not balanced, is it ? Like going to court but, the prosecution lawyers dont turn up.

The simple judgement would be, how would you feel if it was, say, Welsby or Lomax on the receiving end of that challenge ? Maybe you closed your eyes. Certainly, Roby let go of the player when he saw what his mate was doing.


This tribunal only interpreted the previous panels’ rulings, which did include an acknowledgement that there was uncertainty about whether Atkin’s shoulder or wrist were ever in an unnatural position - with the caveat that, even with Atkin twisting his body to avoid injury, the end of natural motion appeared to have been reached and he was in a put in a vulnerable position. There was no new expert evidence. Just a newly introduced definition of unacceptable risk, which the panel found so compelling that they deemed the interpretations and decisions of the previous panels not just wrong but unreasonable.

I imagine the reason this second appeal is (was?) used so rarely is that the tribunal essentially have to say that two panels were not just, in their opinion, incorrect but that they messed up. Now that this panel have shown a willingness to do that, in response to an argument that many view as weak (basically, falling for the ‘given that…’ trick), I expect a lot more of these tribunals to be convened in the future.

Mind you, it doesn’t look like even the RFL is very comfortable with it all. Is it normal for one of these decisions to be accompanied by a reminder that the work of these panels is challenging, complex and difficult and that recommendations for improvements will be made soon?
https://www.rugby-league.com/article/60 ... an-knowles

It’s not quite an explicit apology, but it is at the end of that range.
Hopie wrote:
In Summary:
Referee Team on the Day, bad tackle please leave the field.
MRP, bad tackle please don't come back next week either.
Appeal Board, yup i dunt want you to play eether.
2nd Appeal Board, hold on a minute, that appeal verdict doesn't make complete sense, therefore everybody is wrong and he should play after all....

The second appeal board could overturn the first appeal decision if they wished, but that would still leave the MRP decision in place and allow for a fresh re-run of the 1st appeal, more sensibly they should have said, yes there is a technical error here here, but it was not material to the decision to ban the player, and that is the correct decision which they should have upheld.


I don’t think there is necessarily even a technical error.

wrencat1873 wrote:
Reading it doesn't make the decision any better.
Saints bring along an "expert" who suggests that the movement of the arm was within "the normal range" but, the RFL dont have their own expert" to counter this or, take evidence from the Salford player or, their medical team. Therefore, it's not balanced, is it ? Like going to court but, the prosecution lawyers dont turn up.

The simple judgement would be, how would you feel if it was, say, Welsby or Lomax on the receiving end of that challenge ? Maybe you closed your eyes. Certainly, Roby let go of the player when he saw what his mate was doing.


This tribunal only interpreted the previous panels’ rulings, which did include an acknowledgement that there was uncertainty about whether Atkin’s shoulder or wrist were ever in an unnatural position - with the caveat that, even with Atkin twisting his body to avoid injury, the end of natural motion appeared to have been reached and he was in a put in a vulnerable position. There was no new expert evidence. Just a newly introduced definition of unacceptable risk, which the panel found so compelling that they deemed the interpretations and decisions of the previous panels not just wrong but unreasonable.

I imagine the reason this second appeal is (was?) used so rarely is that the tribunal essentially have to say that two panels were not just, in their opinion, incorrect but that they messed up. Now that this panel have shown a willingness to do that, in response to an argument that many view as weak (basically, falling for the ‘given that…’ trick), I expect a lot more of these tribunals to be convened in the future.

Mind you, it doesn’t look like even the RFL is very comfortable with it all. Is it normal for one of these decisions to be accompanied by a reminder that the work of these panels is challenging, complex and difficult and that recommendations for improvements will be made soon?
https://www.rugby-league.com/article/60 ... an-knowles

It’s not quite an explicit apology, but it is at the end of that range.
'Thus I am tormented by my curiosity and humbled by my ignorance.' from History of an Old Bramin, The New York Mirror (A Weekly Journal Devoted to Literature and the Fine Arts), February 16th 1833.
Re: Knowles Fri Sep 23, 2022 7:20 am  
Re: Knowles
Fri Sep 23, 2022 7:20 am  

bewareshadows User avatar
Silver RLFANS Member
Silver RLFANS Member

Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 12:43 pm
Posts: 8954
Location: Leeds
Member for 13 years
Mild Rover wrote:
I don’t think there is necessarily even a technical error.

This tribunal only interpreted the previous panels’ rulings, which did include an acknowledgement that there was uncertainty about whether Atkin’s shoulder or wrist were ever in an unnatural position - with the caveat that, even with Atkin twisting his body to avoid injury, the end of natural motion appeared to have been reached and he was in a put in a vulnerable position. There was no new expert evidence. Just a newly introduced definition of unacceptable risk, which the panel found so compelling that they deemed the interpretations and decisions of the previous panels not just wrong but unreasonable.

I imagine the reason this second appeal is (was?) used so rarely is that the tribunal essentially have to say that two panels were not just, in their opinion, incorrect but that they messed up. Now that this panel have shown a willingness to do that, in response to an argument that many view as weak (basically, falling for the ‘given that…’ trick), I expect a lot more of these tribunals to be convened in the future.

Mind you, it doesn’t look like even the RFL is very comfortable with it all. Is it normal for one of these decisions to be accompanied by a reminder that the work of these panels is challenging, complex and difficult and that recommendations for improvements will be made soon?
https://www.rugby-league.com/article/60 ... an-knowles

It’s not quite an explicit apology, but it is at the end of that range.


Thanks for the link.

So those calling the rfl corrupt need to understand that this was not a rfl hearing. It was an independent tribunal.

This happens in many walks of life, if you exhaust appeals with a government authority (eg hmrc) you can take it to tribunal but that process is independent of the authority itself.
Mild Rover wrote:
I don’t think there is necessarily even a technical error.

This tribunal only interpreted the previous panels’ rulings, which did include an acknowledgement that there was uncertainty about whether Atkin’s shoulder or wrist were ever in an unnatural position - with the caveat that, even with Atkin twisting his body to avoid injury, the end of natural motion appeared to have been reached and he was in a put in a vulnerable position. There was no new expert evidence. Just a newly introduced definition of unacceptable risk, which the panel found so compelling that they deemed the interpretations and decisions of the previous panels not just wrong but unreasonable.

I imagine the reason this second appeal is (was?) used so rarely is that the tribunal essentially have to say that two panels were not just, in their opinion, incorrect but that they messed up. Now that this panel have shown a willingness to do that, in response to an argument that many view as weak (basically, falling for the ‘given that…’ trick), I expect a lot more of these tribunals to be convened in the future.

Mind you, it doesn’t look like even the RFL is very comfortable with it all. Is it normal for one of these decisions to be accompanied by a reminder that the work of these panels is challenging, complex and difficult and that recommendations for improvements will be made soon?
https://www.rugby-league.com/article/60 ... an-knowles

It’s not quite an explicit apology, but it is at the end of that range.


Thanks for the link.

So those calling the rfl corrupt need to understand that this was not a rfl hearing. It was an independent tribunal.

This happens in many walks of life, if you exhaust appeals with a government authority (eg hmrc) you can take it to tribunal but that process is independent of the authority itself.
We can be bold enough to make a stand and do battle for our views and beliefs. But we must strive to be mature enough not to resort to unnecessary personal attacks upon people with opposing views.
Re: Knowles Fri Sep 23, 2022 7:27 am  
Re: Knowles
Fri Sep 23, 2022 7:27 am  

User avatarwrencat1873 wrote:
wrencat1873 User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 7:28 pm
Posts: 17299
Member for 11 years
Mild Rover wrote:
I don’t think there is necessarily even a technical error.

This tribunal only interpreted the previous panels’ rulings, which did include an acknowledgement that there was uncertainty about whether Atkin’s shoulder or wrist were ever in an unnatural position - with the caveat that, even with Atkin twisting his body to avoid injury, the end of natural motion appeared to have been reached and he was in a put in a vulnerable position. There was no new expert evidence. Just a newly introduced definition of unacceptable risk, which the panel found so compelling that they deemed the interpretations and decisions of the previous panels not just wrong but unreasonable.

I imagine the reason this second appeal is (was?) used so rarely is that the tribunal essentially have to say that two panels were not just, in their opinion, incorrect but that they messed up. Now that this panel have shown a willingness to do that, in response to an argument that many view as weak (basically, falling for the ‘given that…’ trick), I expect a lot more of these tribunals to be convened in the future.

Mind you, it doesn’t look like even the RFL is very comfortable with it all. Is it normal for one of these decisions to be accompanied by a reminder that the work of these panels is challenging, complex and difficult and that recommendations for improvements will be made soon?
https://www.rugby-league.com/article/60 ... an-knowles

It’s not quite an explicit apology, but it is at the end of that range.


Great post and thanks for the info.
I guess that people should point the finger at Saints and their determination to "get their player off", well done to them, a true champion team, and a perfect example of how things should be run.
I may just bow as they take to the field tomorrow.

I do wonder if their "expert" would enjoy the same pressures being applied to their shoulder by Knowles ?
Mild Rover wrote:
I don’t think there is necessarily even a technical error.

This tribunal only interpreted the previous panels’ rulings, which did include an acknowledgement that there was uncertainty about whether Atkin’s shoulder or wrist were ever in an unnatural position - with the caveat that, even with Atkin twisting his body to avoid injury, the end of natural motion appeared to have been reached and he was in a put in a vulnerable position. There was no new expert evidence. Just a newly introduced definition of unacceptable risk, which the panel found so compelling that they deemed the interpretations and decisions of the previous panels not just wrong but unreasonable.

I imagine the reason this second appeal is (was?) used so rarely is that the tribunal essentially have to say that two panels were not just, in their opinion, incorrect but that they messed up. Now that this panel have shown a willingness to do that, in response to an argument that many view as weak (basically, falling for the ‘given that…’ trick), I expect a lot more of these tribunals to be convened in the future.

Mind you, it doesn’t look like even the RFL is very comfortable with it all. Is it normal for one of these decisions to be accompanied by a reminder that the work of these panels is challenging, complex and difficult and that recommendations for improvements will be made soon?
https://www.rugby-league.com/article/60 ... an-knowles

It’s not quite an explicit apology, but it is at the end of that range.


Great post and thanks for the info.
I guess that people should point the finger at Saints and their determination to "get their player off", well done to them, a true champion team, and a perfect example of how things should be run.
I may just bow as they take to the field tomorrow.

I do wonder if their "expert" would enjoy the same pressures being applied to their shoulder by Knowles ?
Re: Knowles Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:09 am  
Re: Knowles
Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:09 am  

User avatarEgg Chasing wrote:
Egg Chasing User avatar
Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 3:14 pm
Posts: 3904
Location: Watching Rugby League
Member for 10 years
bewareshadows wrote:
Thanks for the link.

So those calling the rfl corrupt need to understand that this was not a rfl hearing. It was an independent tribunal.

This happens in many walks of life, if you exhaust appeals with a government authority (eg hmrc) you can take it to tribunal but that process is independent of the authority itself.


A judge (who semmingly cocked up) and two ex players, one of whom has definitely served on the MRP. Hardly "independent"

Just sounds to me like the RFL washing their hands of the error by saying "we weren't there you can't blame us"
Re: Knowles Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:10 am  
Re: Knowles
Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:10 am  
shinymcshine241 Eddie Hemmings's Wig
Eddie Hemmings's Wig

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2022 12:08 pm
Posts: 123
Member for 1 year
It's still a weird interpretation:

"their opinion that there was an unacceptable risk taken by the player was wrong, as they had already agreed that the arm was never in an unnatural position Mr Knowles’ actions were, therefore, not reckless."

The players arm was moved by Knowles, therefore you could consider this a 'unnatural' position (as it wasn't a voluntary movement) together than any movement of the arm by Knowles increased the risk of injury (as opposed to if the arm wasn't moved at all), and since there was no need for Knowles to do what he did it could be deemed reckless too

So I get why they've decided to go with what they did, but it's far from conclusive.
Re: Knowles Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:55 am  
Re: Knowles
Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:55 am  

User avatarjools wrote:
jools User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 12:02 pm
Posts: 10358
Member for 11 years
You know what I just don’t care any more. In fact I’m probably not even going to bother watching the game because no matter what the outcome the talking point is now not likely going to be about the skill and talent of all or any of the players on the field.
the future's bright the future's claret and gold
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ducknumber1, eric35 and 123 guests

REPLY

Subject: 
Message:
   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...

Return to The Virtual Terrace


RLFANS Recent Posts
FORUM
LAST
POST
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
0s
Trinity Heritage Podcast
JamieRobinso
177
FORUM
LAST
VIEW
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
9s
Stand off - playmaker - game controller
jonh
171
11s
Sneyd
Steve0
14
21s
What we currently look like for 2023
jonh
117
26s
Oliver Holmes
Moe syslak
12
27s
Play offs
Faxlore
26
28s
Owners
Dita's Slot
19
34s
Game - Song Titles 20212
Wanderer
14997
47s
Rumours and signings v9
The Whiffy K
24330
53s
Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE
Magic Superb
580
53s
Transfer Talk / Rumour thread V4
Once were Lo
1549
FORUM
NEW
TOPICS
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
TODAY
The Future Of Rugby League 27th Sept 2022
Double Movem
1
TODAY
Brian gone
orangeman
4
TODAY
Betting in 2023
Dita's Slot
3
TODAY
O/T McDermott
The Avenger
3
TODAY
Morgan Knowles just had a look on the Leeds forum
karetaker
3
TODAY
Oliver Holmes
Moe syslak
12
TODAY
IMG
vastman
6
TODAY
Play Off Final Swinton v Dons 02/10/2022 2pm
Jemmo
1
TODAY
Morgan Knowles
Once were Lo
21
TODAY
Year late World Cup
John_D
1
Random Topics selected.
RLFANS Match Centre

TABLES:
Matches on TV
Sun 2nd Oct
NRL RND: 29
09:30
Penrith-Parramatta
CH RND: 30
18:30
Leigh-Batley
Sat 15th Oct
WC2022 RND: 1
14:30
England-Samoa
WC2022 RND: 1
19:30
Australia-Fiji
Sun 16th Oct
WC2022 RND: 1
17:00
Jamaica-Ireland
WC2022 RND: 1
19:30
New Zealand-Lebanon
WC2022 RND: 1
14:30
Scotland-Italy
Mon 17th Oct
WC2022 RND: 1
19:30
France-Greece
Tue 18th Oct
WC2022 RND: 1
19:30
Tonga-Papua NG
Wed 19th Oct
WC2022 RND: 1
19:30
WALES-Cook Islands
Fri 21st Oct
WC2022 RND: 2
19:30
Australia-Scotland
Sat 22nd Oct
WC2022 RND: 2
14:30
Fiji-Italy
WC2022 RND: 2
17:00
England-France
WC2022 RND: 2
19:30
New Zealand-Jamaica
Sun 23rd Oct
WC2022 RND: 2
14:30
Lebanon-Ireland
WC2022 RND: 2
17:00
France-Greece
Mon 24th Oct
WC2022 RND: 2
19:30
Tonga-WALES
Tue 25th Oct
WC2022 RND: 2
19:30
Papua NG-Cook Islands
Fri 28th Oct
WC2022 RND: 3
19:30
New Zealand-Ireland
Sat 29th Oct
WC2022 RND: 3
14:30
England-Greece
Sun 25th Sep
L1 RND: 25 Doncaster52-20Rochdale
CH RND: 29 Leigh70-10York
CH RND: 29 Featherstone28-32Batley
Sat 24th Sep
NRL RND: 28 Penrith32-12Souths
SL RND: 30 Leeds12-24St.Helens
Fri 23rd Sep
NRL RND: 28 NQL Cowboys20-24Parramatta
Sun 18th Sep
WSL2022PO RND: 2 YorkW4-12LeedsW
CH RND: 28 Barrow8-18Batley
CH RND: 28 Halifax24-26York
L1 RND: 24 Swinton32-12Doncaster
Sat 17th Sep
SL RND: 29 St.Helens19-12Salford
NRL RND: 27 Cronulla12-38Souths
L1 RND: 24 Crusaders20-36Rochdale
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Championship 2022 ROUND : 27
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Leigh 27 1306 208 1098 52
Featherstone 27 1058 468 590 47
Halifax 27 837 440 397 40
Barrow 27 759 587 172 37
Batley 27 738 551 187 36
York 27 677 596 81 36
 
Sheffield 27 699 660 39 24
Widnes 27 567 679 -112 24
Bradford 27 521 675 -154 22
Whitehaven 27 488 854 -366 19
LondonB 27 548 740 -192 17
Newcastle 27 559 877 -318 15
Dewsbury 27 385 964 -579 7
Workington 27 296 1139 -843 2
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred League One 2022 ROUND : 20
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Keighley 18 843 154 689 36
Crusaders 18 668 332 336 30
Swinton 18 737 281 456 28
Doncaster 18 618 392 226 26
Rochdale 18 646 451 195 24
Hunslet 18 475 462 13 17
 
Oldham 18 535 473 62 15
Midlands 18 458 632 -174 10
LondonS 18 362 705 -343 10
Cornwall 19 274 782 -508 2
West Wales 19 154 1106 -952 2
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Super League XXVII ROUND : 27
 PLDFADIFFPTS
St.Helens 27 674 374 300 42
Wigan 27 818 483 335 38
Huddersfield 27 613 497 116 35
Catalans 27 539 513 26 32
Leeds 27 577 528 49 29
Salford 27 700 602 98 28
 
Castleford 27 544 620 -76 26
Hull KR 27 498 608 -110 24
Hull FC 27 508 675 -167 22
Wakefield 27 497 648 -151 20
Warrington 27 568 664 -96 18
Toulouse 27 421 745 -324 10
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
National Rugby League 2022 ROUND : 24
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Penrith 21 556 319 237 34
Melbourne 21 630 358 272 30
NQL Cowboys 21 537 329 208 30
Cronulla 21 479 342 137 30
Souths 21 546 412 134 26
Parramatta 21 491 463 28 26
Brisbane 22 496 475 21 26
Sydney 21 521 396 125 24
 
Canberra 21 392 423 -31 22
Manly 21 458 486 -28 18
St.George 21 375 511 -136 18
Canterbury 21 356 497 -141 12
NZ Warriors 21 366 579 -213 12
Newcastle 21 308 560 -252 12
Gold Coast 21 366 562 -196 8
Wests 21 314 527 -213 8
RLFANS Recent Posts
FORUM
LAST
POST
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
0s
Trinity Heritage Podcast
JamieRobinso
177
FORUM
LAST
VIEW
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
9s
Stand off - playmaker - game controller
jonh
171
11s
Sneyd
Steve0
14
21s
What we currently look like for 2023
jonh
117
26s
Oliver Holmes
Moe syslak
12
27s
Play offs
Faxlore
26
28s
Owners
Dita's Slot
19
34s
Game - Song Titles 20212
Wanderer
14997
47s
Rumours and signings v9
The Whiffy K
24330
53s
Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE
Magic Superb
580
53s
Transfer Talk / Rumour thread V4
Once were Lo
1549
FORUM
NEW
TOPICS
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
TODAY
The Future Of Rugby League 27th Sept 2022
Double Movem
1
TODAY
Brian gone
orangeman
4
TODAY
Betting in 2023
Dita's Slot
3
TODAY
O/T McDermott
The Avenger
3
TODAY
Morgan Knowles just had a look on the Leeds forum
karetaker
3
TODAY
Oliver Holmes
Moe syslak
12
TODAY
IMG
vastman
6
TODAY
Play Off Final Swinton v Dons 02/10/2022 2pm
Jemmo
1
TODAY
Morgan Knowles
Once were Lo
21
TODAY
Year late World Cup
John_D
1
Random Topics selected.


Visit the RLFANS.COM SHOP
for more merchandise!