Ferres's challenge was dangerous and he deserves time off and needs to think about the possible outcome of what he did. Hopefully Gildart will not suffer in the future from Ferres's attention. Westwood is an aggressive player who let his emotions get the better of him early in the game to make a statement. He too deserves time off. I would hope that both players, both experienced, will reflect and come back and be a little more aware of what could happen due to their actions. Most we can hope for.

Maybe someone on the panel doesn't like Ablett?

I remember Joe Wardle punching him once as well, he probably didn't get a ban.

Aye, rumour has it that Nicloa Adams has a life size blow up of Carl Ablett to practice her punching technique on.

That was once as in on one occasion rather than Wardle only throwing one shot, as he threw several - most of which landed.

Challenge Cup 2013, IIRC Wardle dismissed in 1st half (subsequent 2 game ban) and Leeds were still easily defeated by their 12 man opponents.

Banning Briers might have led to suggestions that his feeble effort could have harmed someone. Not too difficult to imagine the panel having a laugh at that before dismissing it. Unless of course they too had stakes in the dummy spit sweepstake that week.

where does Brad singletons shot fit in...?
ten minutes into the match and not even sin binned



reckless by Westwood I think he'll get pinged with 3 games.
Given our situation I would like to think Westwood was G'd up and was simply putting pressure on the kicker to show some intent for the rest of the game, but didnt have the smarts to pull out when he got there.

like it or not Rugby is a tough game I'm sure most people would rather be hit face to face than from behind.

and the Sims incident ...That's as tough as he gets, putting a leg near someones midriff.... nothing to see there...

I hope Westwood gets hit with a big ban as I am still v irritated by the RFL response to the Blake Green punch.

"Player pleads guilty to the offence of punching. The player states that it was a big occasion being the Grand Final. The atmosphere was intense with arms and legs everywhere. The player states that he received an elbow which he states was not deliberate from his opponent. The player then wanted to let him know he was there and went in hard but not deliberately. The player states was devastated when he saw on the screen the replays where he had caught his opponent as he never intended to do anything deliberate to hurt his opponent."

"The committee have viewed this incident and the DVD is clear that the player has struck his opponent with a punch. The committee accept this was not a deliberate attack to the head. The committee give the player credit for his guilty plea and show of remorse in this incident and accept it was a highly charged atmosphere in a big game. The player does not have a bad disciplinary record for this type of incident and the committee feel that a 1 match suspension and a £300 fine is appropriate in this instance."

Biggest load of bull ever.

All 3 incidents (Westwood, Ferres & Singleton) deserved red cards.

I have a bit of sympathy with the ref in Ferres case because it wasnt obvious at all what had happened.

I can only assume in Singletons case the officials didn't see where the contact was, otherwise I don't see any reason why Singleton should've got away with that hit.

The Westwood one beggars belief. Child saw it. You can see him watching the incident. The touch judge saw it and even reported contact to the head. A late hit, on a kicker, contact to the head, in that fashion. Easy red card. If the game had been at Leeds I think Child may have plucked up the courage to adequately punish the offence he and his officials clearly saw.

Carney and Wells made the point on Sky that the video ref is absolutely fine being called upon to decide minute details like goal line drop outs but can't influence much on foul play.

Ironically I'm pretty sure McIlorum was given trial by video ref a few years ago for a late hit on a player that had passed the ball.

Quote ="Wigg'n" Ironically I'm pretty sure McIlorum was given trial by video ref a few years ago for a late hit on a player that had passed the ball.'" Was it this one where he did Kirk Dixon straight from the kick off? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElgU3_hfd84

Quote ="Wigg'n" Ironically I'm pretty sure McIlorum was given trial by video ref a few years ago for a late hit on a player that had passed the ball.'" Was it this one where he did Kirk Dixon straight from the kick off? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElgU3_hfd84

I think the Wigan clown maybe alluding to MM's late hit on Laffranchi, but who knows there has been so many, take your pick.

Why are you calling me a clown? Grow up.

Charged, grade D.

Wire fan here.

When i saw the replay i was convinced this was going to be a straight red. We were luck he got a yellow. That said I am a little surprised at the severity of the grading but as a sport we do need to take concussion seriously, and if this is how the RFL continues to deal with these incidents (Late and direct contact with the head) then no arguments from me.

I was surprised that the OP is trying to measure this against Ferres offence tho.

You can misinterpret as much as you like I was merely making the point that what Ferres did was wrong and punished but I do not think he went out to injure to that extent, but on reflection was an extreme incident that could have had far more significant consequences to Gildart and thankfully it appears he should make a full recovery. For me Ferres should not get a 6 or 8 week ban he should have got a ban until the injured player is fit to return plus 2 weeks i.e. if Gildart is out for 3 months Ferres should also be out for 3 months plus an additional ban - That would make him think before he does that again.
An attack to the head on a charging 17stone heap of muscle was IMHO intentional and extremely dangerous and while Sutty will probably only be out a week or so I think what Westwood did deserves a much more severe punishment than 5 weeks and more importantly how do Leeds benefit from that piece of Referee mismanagement. Perhaps he should get a 5 week ban plus a ban from playing against Leeds for the rest of the season, which is likely only to be once more in the hope that Wire get a middle eights tasting session!! of humble pie just like leads got and deserved last year.

How have i misinterpreted your OP?

I was merely implying that the two offences bear no resemblance. They don't.

FWIW i tend to agree that when a player inflicts a serious injury then his ban should reflect the period of absence that the injury he inflicts make necessary.

I don't understand your point that that shouldn't apply to Westwood and in fact he deserves more than that though.

Because, but for bad luck, Ferres could have committed the very same tackle on Gildart with no injury ensuing and Gildart playing the next game for Wigan. Are you saying, under this circumstance, that Ferres should have received no ban at all?

I think the OP is suggesting that there has to be a balance of punishment fitting the crime, with an added tariff for heinous crimes whereby the perpetrator cannot play before the victim gets back on the field. However, this would undoubtedly cause problems if someone's career is ended (Lance Hohaia (sp)anyone?)

He's got 4 matches.

he got off lightly

he's 16 stone and an has never been described as a heap of "Muscle"
Ive seen him in Mcdonalds....





How bizarre that's the same rule for every other player that gets banned and has been since time began..... just Like singleton's ban didn't benefit Catalan, Just Like Wire didnt benefit from Glenn Stewarts ban etc etc etc what an odd statement.....



.

Humble Pie...!!!!! oh yes because Wire fans, the players and the club are famous for bragging about our League title wins aren't we.
The pie wasn't even invented the last time we won the league.....

Fair points. In the case of Ferres and others I think they should serve a minimum ban of x games which is then extended until the injured player has played twice. So for Ferres he misses 6 minimum, if gildart does not play again this season, neither does Ferres. That would make players think twice. In the case of say flower he would have had to appeal what would be in effect a life ban. Sounds harsh but would help cut this stuff out IMO.

Why would he? Hohaia played again for Saints after that incident.

I'd bring out the dunking stool.

If he sinks, he's a wizard and will drown.
If he floats, he's a wizard and will be drowned.

Haaland played again for man city, but Roy Keane clearly ended his career