: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:55 am  

In all these cases it should be down the the RFL to dish out punishments whether they be short term, long term, or even permanent suspensions . It is hardly in Saints best interests to sack, or even suspend, one of their best players and it was the same with Rovers and Cockayne. However, because of the players circumstances (injury) I believe it was in our best interest to sack Reardon.

Some clubs have shown in the past that they are willing to cheat the system in order to attempt to gain an advantage. Why should the same clubs be allowed to administer their own punishments on players who are bringing far more 'disrepute' to the game than a coach speaking out or even a player betting on a game.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:10 am  

Thelonius wrote:

In all these cases it should be down the the RFL to dish out punishments whether they be short term, long term, or even permanent suspensions . It is hardly in Saints best interests to sack, or even suspend, one of their best players and it was the same with Rovers and Cockayne. However, because of the players circumstances (injury) I believe it was in our best interest to sack Reardon.

Some clubs have shown in the past that they are willing to cheat the system in order to attempt to gain an advantage. Why should the same clubs be allowed to administer their own punishments on players who are bringing far more 'disrepute' to the game than a coach speaking out or even a player betting on a game.

I'm not sure the RFL could legally adminster such bans and punishments. I bet they could be challenged in the courts.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:18 am  

Thelonius wrote:

In all these cases it should be down the the RFL to dish out punishments whether they be short term, long term, or even permanent suspensions . It is hardly in Saints best interests to sack, or even suspend, one of their best players and it was the same with Rovers and Cockayne. However, because of the players circumstances (injury) I believe it was in our best interest to sack Reardon.

Some clubs have shown in the past that they are willing to cheat the system in order to attempt to gain an advantage. Why should the same clubs be allowed to administer their own punishments on players who are bringing far more 'disrepute' to the game than a coach speaking out or even a player betting on a game.

OK, but lets not throw stones from within a glass house.

We may have players who have been involved in more serious, but less publicised, incidents than any mentioned on here.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:32 am  

FireWire wrote:

OK, but lets not throw stones from within a glass house.

We may have players who have been involved in more serious, but less publicised, incidents than any mentioned on here.

Look, that time Briers forgot to take his books back to the library is water under the bridge.

He paid his fine (2p per day) and has learnt his lesson.

Just get off his back FFS

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:20 pm  

bird on plane back 4 leeds game

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:54 pm  

His sentencing is 22nd June - should hopefully mean he is unavailable to play against us on the 20th in Barcelona.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:02 pm  

SEB wrote:

His sentencing is 22nd June - should hopefully mean he is unavailable to play against us on the 20th in Barcelona.

Good news for us then.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:09 pm  

Tones Tackle wrote:

No. Thats the whole point, saints are a disgrace.

The RFL needs to step in here and ban all those found guilty of whatever criminal offences they have commited.

Pryce, Reardon, Bird and that lad from Hull KR all need to be dealt with properly by the authorites for bringing shame on our great game.

The RFL are extremely weak for not taking any action IMO.

The clubs will do whatever suits them best, ie saints do nothing to one of their best players, wire use it as an excuse to get shut of Reardon etc etc.

In that case, do we go down the NRL road and ban players before they have even been tried in a court of law?

IMO action should be taken by the RFL banning players depending on the crime, length of sentence (suspended sentence or not, community hours, or fines) and how high profile the case in the media. The higher profile the case the more it puts the sport in a bad image.

However I think punishing players for a small brush with the law or merely coming within 100m of a policeman is a bit over the top. Punishing players who face indictment or certain either way offences certainly should be punished by the RFL, but I think punishing summary offences is taking it too far.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:59 pm  

mark_m wrote:

I'm not sure the RFL could legally adminster such bans and punishments. I bet they could be challenged in the courts.

FireWire wrote:

OK, but lets not throw stones from within a glass house.

We may have players who have been involved in more serious, but less publicised, incidents than any mentioned on here.

It may be difficult to take retrospective action now against the likes of Pryce, Reardon, Cockayne or any other player/club representative, but the RFL should seek agreement from all clubs that in future they (the RFL) will have the power to impose whatever sanction they deem appropriate if a player brings the game into disrepute (which surely is the very least that could be levelled at Reardon and Pryce).

The punishment should fit the crime, but at the very very least a player should be banned from playing whilst they are staying in one of Her Majesties custodial establishments (obviously), under a suspended sentence or doing community service.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:02 pm  

fredie wrote:

bird on plane back 4 leeds game

hes taking 2 inches off his door.