Re: DR Breach? : Sun Aug 17, 2014 8:08 am  

scorer wrote:

Perhaps the RFL when deciding on the DR scheme should have stated amongst the many rules " the penalty for any breach will be a 3 point deduction " and no it's not with the benefit of hindsight it's poor management and the result of a hastily thought out scheme.

I dispute the comment "hastily thought out".

Well, the "thought out" bit, anyway.

Re: DR Breach? : Sun Aug 17, 2014 8:08 am  

The objective of all rules should be to make the competition as fair as possible to all concerned.

There are situations where extreme complications occur such as sides going into administration. Results can't be expunged or games replayed in this situation. It's simple not practicable.

In cup games if a team is found to have played an ineligible player in round one, but the incident isn't identified until after round three has been played, the team that lost in round three is re-instated, not the team from round one - because it wouldn't be practicable to do the whole thing again. This makes sense although not perfect.

Most rules are not perfect as they can't cover every possible eventuality but what doesn't make sense is that the RFL have had an opportunity to apply fairer rules in this case which would have meant Sheffield were awarded the match against Batley - and they've chosen not to do it.

If Sheffield got relegated on the back of a try being scored by an ineligible player scoring it, how fair would that be?

I think the RFL had an opportunity to rectify this situation in a better way than they have.

Re: DR Breach? : Sun Aug 17, 2014 8:19 am  

I think a 3 point penalty for breaching the DR rules by fielding an ineligible player is fine.

We can all come up with variants; eg 3 points deduction AND deduct any points you got in the relevant match etc etc.

But I think the principle of the breach of the rules being committed as soon as the match starts with an ineligible player on the field (without considering what the eventual score was was) is ok.

If you start trying to fit the penalty to what the eventual score was you'd end up with no penalty at all for a club breaching the rules but where they lost the game in question (and didn't get a bonus point either). That can't be right.

BTW, Crooks scored a try near the end of the Keighley v Doncaster match. What if Keighley get relegated on a narrow points difference (still a possibility)?

Re: DR Breach? : Sun Aug 17, 2014 8:47 am  

Mr Churchill wrote:

I think a 3 point penalty for breaching the DR rules by fielding an ineligible player is fine.

We can all come up with variants; eg 3 points deduction AND deduct any points you got in the relevant match etc etc.

But I think the principle of the breach of the rules being committed as soon as the match starts with an ineligible player on the field (without considering what the eventual score was was) is ok.

If you start trying to fit the penalty to what the eventual score was you'd end up with no penalty at all for a club breaching the rules but where they lost the game in question (and didn't get a bonus point either). That can't be right.

BTW, Crooks scored a try near the end of the Keighley v Doncaster match. What if Keighley get relegated on a narrow points difference (still a possibility)?

I agree that we'll all come up with slightly different ways to solve the problem. There is no perfect solution.

My personal answer would be to deduct three points for the breach regardless of the outcome of the game. The game concerned should also see the offending side receive no points from the match. Three points should be awarded to the non-offending side.

The points difference for the game should be one of +13 for the non-offending side, and -13 for the offending team, unless the original result was more beneficial to the non-offending team.

In this way, as many bases are covered as is reasonably practicable. Sheffield wouldn't have been inconvenienced and Keighley's points difference wouldn't have been adversely affected.

Let's hope that in the interest of fairness to all concerned that these breaches don't have any major consequences to the outcome of the league positions or promotion/relegation issues.

Re: DR Breach? : Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:38 am  

Surprised Batley and Wales coach John Kear got it wrong. Haven't seen any comment from him and could be a massive mistake on his part.

Re: DR Breach? : Thu Aug 21, 2014 8:01 am  

Batley, as well as the Dons, are appealing against their points deduction for fielding an ineligible player.

Both clubs have revealed little as to why they feel an appeal is justified.

I've been checking through the RFL rules to see if I could identify any areas that could be contentious. The rule that has been breached is that the said players had not played three games for their Dual Reg side before the transfer deadline, making them ineligible for games after the transfer deadline.

B3:17 Dual Registered Players who have a Salary Cap Value of £20,000 or more i.e. those who receive a category A, B, C or D classification, must have played in at least three League or League Cup fixtures for the Championships club that season before the end of season registration deadline which applies in that Competition in order to play in games which fall after that deadline whether they be regular season or Play Off games.
Dual Registered Players who switch over to a Loan Agreement following the end of season registration deadline must have played in at least three games of the regular season in order to be eligible for the Play Offs.

Could it be possible that the Dons had attempted to switch Ben Crooks over to a loan agreement on the Saturday, after the Friday transfer deadline, which would be the day before the Keighley game, thereby making the three game rule irrelevant according to the above rule? The only condition that then seems to apply is that he must play three games in order to to be eligible for the Play Offs.

Could this be what all the fuss is about?

Re: DR Breach? : Thu Aug 21, 2014 8:11 am  

Three points deducted or none - you'll probably still finish fourth.

Why would anyone want to risk a bigger penalty than the slap on the wrist Dons have been given ?

Leave well enough alone.


Batley - on the other hand - different kettle of fish. On the face of it, they've had a lighter penalty, just losing the three points they gained when playing the ineligible player. Yet those three points will most likely tip the scales towards relegation. They have to appeal.

And the appeals need to be held soon. Whitehaven, in particular, need to know where they stand.

Re: DR Breach? : Thu Aug 21, 2014 10:14 am  

Rugby League WAS once called a SIMPLE game played by SIMPLE people.

It gets more like R U every year.

Re: DR Breach? : Thu Aug 21, 2014 10:18 am  

Now ruled by SIMPLE people.

Re: DR Breach? : Thu Aug 21, 2014 5:33 pm  

griff1998 wrote:

Three points deducted or none - you'll probably still finish fourth.

Why would anyone want to risk a bigger penalty than the slap on the wrist Dons have been given ?

Leave well enough alone.


Batley - on the other hand - different kettle of fish. On the face of it, they've had a lighter penalty, just losing the three points they gained when playing the ineligible player. Yet those three points will most likely tip the scales towards relegation. They have to appeal.

And the appeals need to be held soon. Whitehaven, in particular, need to know where they stand.

Could be right let Batley appeal and if they get a good result we could benefit if a bad one we should not be affected if we've not appealed.
We need to win one game and get a bonus point from the other and fourth is ours. It's in our own hands.