Is the punishment too severe?

St Helens claimed an injury crisis had forced them to rest 12 regulars for the Super League match against Bradford.

But all 12 returned to the fray in the Challenge Cup final defeat by Wigan.

The tribunal found that they had "engaged in conduct prejudicial to the interests of the game" and hit them with the heavy fine.

Does the punishment fit the crime?

This debate is now closed. A selection of your e-mails appear below.

The decision to fine St Helens is farcical and much closer to bringing the game into disrepute than anything St Helens have done. The vast majority of the team that Saints played against Bradford have played several times this season. Two key players (Long and Cunningham) who didn't play are now out for long periods - perhaps St Helens should be fined again for that? No other sport would do this, calling into question the ethics of professional doctors and physios. The RFL were invited to verify that the players were injured and chose not to, opening themselves up to a legal challenge from St Helens.
Rich, London, UK

Millward picked 13 men under contract to his club. What rule can he possibly have broken?
Neil, England

Saints have been subject to a formal investigation according to the rules that Saints accept as part of their agreement with the RFL. They should now shut up, pay up and get on with the season
John Marchant, France

It's good to see Saints get what they deserve. An under strength team is one thing but playing 12 players for 25 minutes, when there are still substitutions available is taking the mickey.
Jon, England

A couple of games later they fielded 14 players for part of a game. Surely that made up for it?
Bob, UK

Bradford have always fielded a full strength team the week before a Challenge Cup final. I don't know what to make of the fine. Saints are in financial dire straits as it is, so maybe we should offer the opportunity to pay off the fine via a points reduction. A precedent had to be set, though - if every team who think they will struggle at a top club decided to rest players for an 'easier' match the following week, the SL would become a joke.
Nick Cartwright, UK

How can the medical evidence be properly examined by the panel when the panel had no medical person on it, nor did they call the Saints doctor? This could be a big test case and if the RFL have not taken in all the evidence then they have just shot themselves in the foot. Something big could happen and it could have a lasting effect, like the Bosman ruling did in football.
Stevenage Saint, UK

The precedent was set in 1993 when Leeds fielded an under strength team before playing Wigan in the Challenge Cup Final. Ironically the opponents, St Helens, were the first and loudest to complain. St Helens should have had an official RL doctor examine all the missing players before the Bradford match - no one is going to believe them even if it's the truth.
Michael, UK

I think the fine is fair. Why should St Helens be allowed to bring down the game by lowering the standards just to aid their cup aspirations. As a fan of a club not in the big four this is a big sign that the league is waking up and realising that the good of the game is more important than what the big clubs want.
Ian Fellows, England

Can I presume that Warrington are fined every week?
Michael Kennedy, Warrington

I think St Helens got off lightly and should be grateful. Bradford were fined �50,000 for less and if anyone should be appealing it should be the RFL for more money.
Jackie Dempsey, UK

There should be no punishment for Saints as they did nothing wrong. If Super League was organised properly the champions would be the team finishing top and then they wouldn't have done it.

St Helens should be able to field any team they want. Would they have been fined if the players had contract disputes and refused to play?
Jamie, UK

St. Helens is a professional team with professional players. Regardless of who they play they are still that professional team. It's not as though they put out a team made up of blokes from the street. Surely if they decide to field a weaker team compared to their normal team that's their decision.
Dan, England

It was wrong to fine them - they can stand to lose this sort of money! Deducting points or barring them from next year's cup would have been a more suitable punishment.
Marilyn Chapman, West Yorkshire

Chris Caisly says that his crowds were affected - well it was only by a mere 1,000 or so if the recent Wigan game is to go by and that is because not many Saints fans turned up because they were saving money. Bringing the game into disrepute? All the years of our performances have enhanced the game of rugby league - we are the most attractive team to watch - pay us �25,000 for ever game that we bring pleasure!
Simon Murphy, Lancaster

Come on - what about us Bradford fans getting our money back? You can watch the reserves for �3 not full price! They took the rise and it backfired!
john O'Connor, Bradford

Not harsh enough. It cannot be acceptable for a team to go into a game intending to lose. It cheats the fans, cheats the opposition and cheats the other teams. And on top of that, from Saints point of view it was totally ineffective. The rested players looked rusty in the cup final.
Mjm, UK

What a joke. The RFL had every chance to advise Saints before the Bradford game but chose not to thereby tacitly agreeing to what Saints proposed to do. To now turn round and fine them is pure hypocrisy.

I am now waiting to hear why Bradford's executives are not being penalised for stirring and creating "negative marketing" for the game in the national press. I hope the money goes to grassroots development of Rugby League and not to the Coffers of the RFL.
David Butler, Germany

I bet that Bradford would have fielded a weak side if the tables were turned. Wigan managed to get away with it because they won against a weaker side, so it must go on the result. Next year, look at the bigger picture and make RL look like a professional organization for once. Please!!
Jon Topping, England

There are too many games per season to expect these top athletes to play every game. It's about time whoever decides on the amount of games per season took some responsibility.
Roger Lancaster, New Zealand

If a rugby league club like St Helens can't find enough players for that game then there is something very wrong with the game of rugby league.
Ray Gent, England

Saints have paid the price for fielding a weakened team. They lost the Challenge Cup and now they have lost �25,000. Wakefield Trinity had points deducted last season for breaking the salary gap, perhaps a points deductions would have been fairer.
Mr Benson, Wakefield

Wigan fielded a side with seven players rested, but nobody seems to care about that. Double standards once again for Morris Lindsay's 'men'
Darren Fitzgerald, UK

Saints were not badly done by. In fact, they should have also had points deducted. It is time Ian and his board were made to understand they don't rule rugby league and they cannot make their own rules.
Val Billingham, England

This punishment is a complete and utter farce. If Saints wish to throw away a game then that is their decision. They will already be suffering come the end of the season when they are not in the position that they could be.

This should have remained an internal matter. The RFL Tribunal is saying that it has brought the game into disripute. Rubbish! The game was played at Bradford, and so most of the fans will have been delighted.

All that should have happened is that the travelling Saints fans should have had their money refunded. Ultimately, this was just a tactical decision that has been hugely blown out of proportion.
Andy, England