: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:03 am  

Wadski wrote:

LMS pleaded guilty and Manager offered no defence for his actions.

DF was being hit by 3 Wigan players and defended his teammate.

Why didn't the two other Wigan players who obviously ran into the brawl amd where throwing punches get to visit Red Hall? That's the actual Spot the Difference...

I think you will find (if you can be bothered looking on the SL TV highlights) that 1 Quin was being hit by 3 Frogs. LMS piled in to offer some cover.
In our case we got 3 players banned...the frogs 1.
In this case, a few from each team can count themselves lucky IMO
Also, the initial post wasn't meant to smoke out apologists from Hudds....just point out the blatant inconsistancy of the tw@s at the RFL Discilinary Hearing

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:14 am  

saints35 bulls0 wrote:

how can he be found guilty of intentionally striking an opponent and not get a ban?

It's Challenge Cup week, traditionally a good week to be up before the beak at Red Hall. Your chances of avoiding a ban improve the further into the competition you get.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:51 am  

Mason was lucky not to get a ban, but as the defence points out he made no attempt to punch a wigan player, where as LMS threw several, I guess theres the difference right there.

Still, good to see Wigan can get away with starting brawls though.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:52 am  

Code13 wrote:

Mason was lucky not to get a ban, but as the defence points out he made no attempt to punch a wigan player, where as LMS threw several, I guess theres the difference right there.

Still, good to see Wigan can get away with starting brawls though.

Who started it?

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:00 pm  

Code13 wrote:

Mason was lucky not to get a ban, but as the defence points out he made no attempt to punch a wigan player, where as LMS threw several, I guess theres the difference right there.

Still, good to see Wigan can get away with starting brawls though.

fair point...but I would still think that the "running into a fight and turning into a brawl" part carried some weight. Also, the punch/swinging arm defence.....is tentative to say the least.
If I were LMS and Quins RL, I would be penning a letter asking for clarification on the rules and penalties incurred.....

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:01 pm  

gutterfax wrote:

fair point...but I would still think that the "running into a fight and turning into a brawl" part carried some weight. Also, the punch/swinging arm defence.....is tentative to say the least.
If I were LMS and Quins RL, I would be penning a letter asking for clarification on the rules and penalties incurred.....

You drag it up at every opportunity. I'm sure they've forgotten about an incident which occurred a year ago.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:12 pm  

RB wrote:

You drag it up at every opportunity. I'm sure they've forgotten about an incident which occurred a year ago.

er.....what?
I think I dropped this about 3 weeks after the event and have raised it again due to the pi55 poor administration being shown, especially with regard to consistancy, by the disciplinary board this year.
It was taken that he was facing at least 1 game....even by a fair amount of Giants fans, but to get £300 and a telling off is just poor.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:15 pm  

And what happened to Thomas Leuluai? He was the worst offender in my view.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:21 pm  

RB wrote:

Who started it?

Hansen

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:22 pm  

Code13 wrote:

Hansen