I've spent many years trying to convince my fellow Cas fans that the RFL are not 'out to get' our club in any way, as many seem to think. However, it does seem that some clubs and players are treated in a different way to others.
My first point is the lack of consistency in the process of charging players. What is ignored in some games (surely everyone saw the numerous punches in the Cats-Leeds game) leads to a charge in other games (ie Chase charged for punching in the Cas-Bulls game).
Secondly, the inconsistency of punishments when a player is found guilty of an offence. On 27/5/11 Josh Perry was charged with a grade B offence. His previous record is EXACTLY the same as Chase's (completely clean) - Perry - 1 match ban; Chase - 2 match ban.
I could give lots of other examples of similar inconsistencies - unfortunately for the RFL publicising the disciplinary procedure has improved transparency, but unfortunately this transparency means we can all see the inconsistencies in the system.
Rant over.

Appeal. It works for Leeds.

Just to add another one (involving leeds

) ....

Last week Hep Cahill gets sin binned for a late challenge on the kicker and hauled in front of the disciplinary and recieves a one match ban.

Delaney at the weekend also got sin binned for the same offence yet isn't even charged.....





Rant not even begun.

Exactly.


We're not them.

IIRC Delaney was binned because 'it is an automatic binning offence' or summat like that , according to the ref.

So how come there were at least TWO Catalans players got away with the same thing prior to Delaney getting binned ?

Absolute Joke. End off

[url=http://www.castigers.com/article.php?id=1635Appeal in Tomorrow[/url

I'm trying to be careful not to seem to 'pick' on other individual clubs, I'm not saying "[insert club get away with everything, just that the consistency is not there. Just to prove a point I believe Jacob Emmit was found guilty of a similar offence to Chase and received no ban.
The other that comes to mind is Lee Radford's dismissal against Leeds, when he threw many punches (charged with grade B offence). He was not given a suspension despite the panel deciding that:
[i"It is not disputed that Lee punched Bailey repeatedly but all but one of those punches made no contact but the one punch that did was of sufficient impact to cause some degree of injury to Bailey."[/i
So no ban for a player throwing multiple punches and causing injury to his opponent, and a two match ban for Chase for throwing one punch which did not cause injury. Hmmmmmm............

i think fans of cas should be thankful they are'nt wakefield.....and shut the hell up!

I'd say inconsistent certainly, whether they are bent or not is just a case of motive.

Josh Perry was involved in a one on one dust off in which no punches were landed and even the referee was laughing at them. His opponent was Flower from Crusaders and he wasn't banned.

There was a punch up at Cas between Cooper and someone else and no one was banned there despite several punches landing.

If they are going to bring disciplinary processes in they have to be applied across the board. The current process seems to be aimed at banning a set number of players per week. Once they've got enough some serious incidents slip through the net. In weeks where there are no serious incidents, they scour the footage for anything to apply a ban, for example Tuson's ban against Saints or LMS's ban for the incident involving Morley.

I would suggest that like all people, and systems on this planet they are consistantly inconsistant which is why there is change and development in so many things.

Sorry if that's a concept beyond some but that is how life, systems, culture etc., has developed on this planet.

Did chase run in and throw the punch?

They seem to frown on that alot more than standing face to face and having a bit of biff.

Dirty LMS