www.rugby-league.com/article/366 ... view-panel

www.rugby-league.com/article/366 ... view-panel

Don’t remember seeing that many in one week for a long time, some big bans in there.

Thought Bentley would get more to be honest. Can't complain about Holmes getting the same as Dwyer, although it's always strange to see bans after a sin-binning. This suggests the Dwyer late hit and the Holmes high tackle were both sending off offences.

I expect we'll see Longstaff in the 17 this week?

Harsh on Dwyer. I get the crack down on that style of contact but it was pretty low risk and low impact. I would have through a sin bin would be sufficient.

Seems like Agar had inadvertently missed Ganson’s comms pre-season. We knew this sort of thing was going to be clamped down on, but both Dwyer and Prior made hits they weren’t committed to after the ball had gone. Both coincidentally on our most experienced half-back. Seemed like he was the target in he game plan.

If you watch the replay the proper way to do it was shown in the contact immediately after the Prior hit on Widdop… not sure who the Leeds player was but Walker releases the ball and relaxes, so the Leeds tackler relaxes, still making contact but loosely wrapping the arms around Walker without making the ‘hit’.

If discipline isn't clamped down by coaches & injury protocols are getting extended ,some clubs could find themselves with pretty sp squads at critical times.

I don't think the sport can risk not taking some pretty strong action on changing the way the game is played in terms of head contact / late contact. I don't think this will be like in previous years where they are hot on a topic for a month and then it falls away.

Wire are appealing Holmes ban.

I think they need to start acting appropriately to the incident. Napa was the bad one this week, he should be having the book thrown at him. He's got a grade 'D' which entitles him to a panel hearing I believe, where he'll thrown a load of mitigating factors in, like having a bad week and missing his cat in Australia. He could walk away with a 3 game ban and a £300 fine. IMO that kind of deliberate head shot with an illegal technique should carry 6-8 games and a proper fine, say £2,000.

You do still have to worry about consistency though with the RFL. They don't have a great track record with this with previous initiatives/crack downs.

The other thing they need to do is start banning and fining coaches for trying to influence disciplinary decisions. McNamara this week post game and in the days after exonerating Napa, saying it clearly bounced up off the ball and wasn't a bad challenge for example. Willie Poaching has also had a pop this week about the new rules.

Napa's incident was against Saints so he will be punished properly. Bentleys was worse because of the swinging arm IMO but both bans should be upheld FWIW. I didn't see Connors though so can't comment. Bentley will start to get proper bans and cards now he isn't in a saints shirt.

I don't like the coaches getting involved to put pressure on the disciplinary panel and I don't like pundits etc saying playing against 12 ruins the spectacle for fans. Fact of the matter is if players stay disciplined then it will always be 13 v 13 if cards and bans aren't used the discipline will never improve, players will get concussion and the rfl will get more early onset dementia cases against it in the future.

You reckon there's a bias in Saints favour and against Leeds

Leeds?

Bentley was never more than a wind up merchant at Saints. Lots of little indisgretions, but nothing really worth a prolonged ban. He was never sent off for Saints either I don't think.

Bentley's wasn't worse than Napa's either. Napa was direct contact with the head with the point of the shoulder with no attempt to wrap his arms. Just as bad as it gets that one. Bentley's was more of a sly dig in comparison, against a player he has a known grudge against. Look back at the Saints v Wire games last season, those two are at it constantly. Probably only a 1 game ban as he's got a very clean previous disciplinary record.