No he doesn't; like everyone else in Leeds colours, he's justifying that a player who came up swinging from a tackle wasn't banned, when many others throughout the season have been; I wasn't aware that the RFL were operating a biff pass system, whereby veteran players are allowed to make their own judgements about whether a tackle is too rough and mete out summary justice on the field.



He deems it a 'good' panel, because he got what he wanted; whereas earlier in the day, JP deemed it 'farcical.' It seems that a bit of profile, some media work and the odd Twitter tantrum is all it takes to get what you want at Red Hall.

Don't forget an LS postcode. They're apparently handy as well. (Except LS10 of course)

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!