Saints must have had compelling evidence. Had they have lost the appeal and it be deemed frivolous, they would have lost Walmsley for the Wigan fixture. I don't think they would have risked that for a £250 fine. If it was for the incident I think it was, it was a head clash, commented on at the time by the clowns, sorry commentary team, on Sky. It seems at the moment the review panel are leaving themselves open to appeals. The McDonnell ban and appeal shows that they just took the word of the touch judges decision on the field as gospel, It would appear as a result of Leeds appeal, that despite all the video angles, they couldn't find the evidence of that. I presume the touch judge must have back tracked as they allowed the appeal. How many times has this happened and a club hasn't appealed for fear of the appeal being deemed frivolous and losing a player for an extra game with an important fixture at stake.

I believe head contacts reduced significantly last season, maybe there is a thought that the ‘medicine has been taken’ and things are back under control. I’d imagine if numbers start creeping back up we will see a return.

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/63700/disciplinary-%7C-match-review-panel

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/63700/disciplinary-%7C-match-review-panel

One game suspension for Ipape's assault on Fitzgibbon. Not enough for that "tackle". 

Ipape was given a Grade C which = 5pts under the new disciplinary system, and that doesn't constitute a ban. Ipape's total disciplinary pts this season = 7.5pts hence the one match ban for accruing between 6-8 pts.

5pts is even more lenient than I'd thought. Wow ... tis b*llocks