Quote ="tropical1"hi No charge for Craig www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary.php however have a look at how many giants players have had their tackles looked at. TM obviously had a point'" The RFL found nothing wrong with Huddersfield`s tackling according to the BBC. So what excuses does Matterson want now ???

Quote ="tropical1"hi No charge for Craig www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary.php however have a look at how many giants players have had their tackles looked at. TM obviously had a point'" The RFL found nothing wrong with Huddersfield`s tackling according to the BBC. So what excuses does Matterson want now ???

They found things wrong with your tackling, they just said a penalty was sufficient.

was there for all to see c*ck head

If Materson had not brought this to light as an excuse for loosing you lot would not have even known,so dont come with this evey one saw it crap.

there were many complaints regarding tackles from many of the people who were watching the game.

For TM to mention them is not an excuse he is just stating that they appeared to be grapple tackling and the FACT the the rlf looked at 4 tackles proves that on the initial look at the tackle there looked to be something wrong. If there wasn't a hint of a grapple tackle they wouldn't have been looked at as none of the tackles were put on report by Ganson these are tackles the disciplinary board themselves have picked to have a closer look at.

And I bet in Huddersfields next game they will be penalised to death if they carry on to tackle in the same way as they did on saturday as the refs will be looking more carefully at their tackles.