That's not really what BM said though was it, he said he thought the panel got it wrong.

And so what if JP said something different, I never mentioned him did I?

You will find Neil Hudgell disagree, even going so far as accepting no contradiction in specifically the Poore and Carney cases.



'Previous' is part of the disciplinary process. Im not sure why its shocking, or thought of as unfair, or for some reason biased, that the committee will look differently on a Prop with a relatively outstanding disciplinary record taking a lot of , what if we were being kind, we would call provocation, than they would a Prop with an absolutely terrible record doing the same thing.

Given the RFL's recent clampdown on punching I'm very surprised he didn't end up with a ban. I'm well aware he was provoked, that kind of niggely rough stuff goes on in every game. The Leigh player got his punishment in the form of a yellow card which is more than most aggressors get. Peacock simply has to keep his cool, he didn't and we all saw the result. As far as I can remember EVERY other player who has thrown successive punches in the last few years has been banned. I think 1 match in this case would have been fair given a pretty good disciplinary record.



The fact he didn't enter an EGP does make me suspicious he knew in advance what was coming.

player" is baffling.

That's quite a claim there.

It's not a claim, I just think it raises a suspicion. If you look at virtually every other case of punching the player, where eligible has entered an EGP to get a reduced suspension.

He may have been advised that players in the past with clean records get a lenient sentence and took his chance. I question 'why' he has never been banned at 36 and as a forward, he has been involved in a lot of 'biff' in his day.

What are you suspicious of?

Didn't realise the bottom pic was from 2006!

Why do you think I put 2 pics of the Mason incident on!

What's that got to do with the Farrell incident?



Just so we're clear this is the same Justin Poore who had never been red carded or banned during a long NRL career including SoO appearances.



Also, the vast majority, and by that I mean almost all, of the cited incidents happened after the Farrell incident so even if you're post had any validity, which it doesn't, none of that would have affected the outcome of of the disciplinary panel who banned him for the punch on Farrell.



So how come Jamie Peacock, who has a track record of throwing punches, can get away with throwing 4 or 5 punches at a man half his size, on National TV and not pick up a ban?



While we're at it how come the homophobic abuse and foul language Peacock used in the Warrington game, clearly picked up by the cameras, has been conveniently ignored by all?

Now you're just making things up. Stick to crown green bowls,Presh! RL is ,apparently, too rough for you. Mwah!