he already had hold of hurrell before his feet left the floor...it was stupid yes,malicious no, you'd be saying same as me if it was a Leeds player...not saying he doesnt deserve a ban but it wasnt done with intent to injure the player and if u think it was then u need to give ya head a wobble. did any of your players kick off? no. if it was so obvious it was intentional you'd see all your players rush in.

Why would I want to travel all the way to Leeds to go and stand/sit in three stands full of home speccies? Anyway, if you buy an away ticket for Leeds you get given the western terrace, absolute poop hole.

Your new south stand does look the dogs gonads though. However, I don't think it'll be as intimidating as the old south stand.

There was plenty of Wire fans in our end at your Ikea flat pack stadium on Saturday. Just glad it wasn't windy.

Perhaps because we sold the 3 home stands out and thanks to your lack of traveling support they were able to go in there?

Not sure what that has to do with my point of traveling wire fans buying tickets for a Leeds home stand though...

Of course he already had hold of Hurrell, he's not going to fly through the air at him. That style of tackle can only really be done when you've got a player held stationary on his feet - you then jump and apply your full body weight against the knee, forcing the pressure on the joint against it's natural bend - it's a technique that was used to injure people by Rob Parker years ago, and is employed every now and then when a cheap shot merchant finds themselves in a position worth doing it. You're either extremely naive, have never played the game or are ridiculously blinkered, or all of the above.

never played the game and of course I'm blinkered lol every fan of a club is towards their players, just saying how i saw it, stupid but not malicious, u see it as he was trying to injure and I don't think he was, just tried using his weight to rip the ball, as said was silly and reckless but don't think it was with intent to injure...no problem with the ban as like u said it's been used before to injure players so fair enough, and don't think Westwood has been cited for that kind of tackle mostly high shots or brainfarts like Blake green. just think it was unfortunate that hurrells leg went that way. anyways agree to disagree, gd luck against Wigan.

Fair play. All the best for the rest of the season.

Westwood, a walking thug who excels in giving cheap shots to opposing players, his two game ban is well deserved, the guy is a coward who hits people when they least expect it. Like my last comment in this section unless you play to the same level of violence as Warrington did then you are going to get nothing against this team when playing at Warrington with the this ref. It should have been a straight red. This is the problem with looking over the game after the match it doesn't help the team you are playing against but the next two teams they play. The video ref should have made the call. Unfortunately over the last 5 years the Warrington pack have become thugs the only way to beat thugs is to clatter them first, hence saints and Wigan always beat them in the important games.

Westwood is a bit of a grub but Leeds need more (legal) tiger than they have, Luckily Hurrell has gargantuan legs and can take some hammer. Wouldn’t be surprised if he missed a game or two though.

Would you like sauce or mayo with that?

What important games do Saints beat us in? 3 play-off semi finals - 3 Wire victories. Westwood/King got deserved bans

Must confess I usually enjoy watching Westwood play. Just not against us. Bit of a throwback, our Ben is.

Proper forward. his kind has slowly been rubbed out the game to the increasing need for good wholesome family friendly 'sport'. Any team and any fan would be lying if they said they wouldn't have had him in their pack.

Gives it & takes it. Love him.

Spoken like a true Cas lad

Don’t have a problem with a bit of biff, it’s the bending of limbs in the cannonball/ninja tackles etc that I don’t like.

Proper forward? Im sure Blake Green agrees he's a sh#&*ouse pure & simple.

You ever played the game? Ever had been tackled and had something said to you? been pinched or had a whisper in the ear? had your balls grabbed, head ruffled, been wound up? Or maybe seen the opposition doing something similar or something equally as sly to one of your team mates...

Not saying it's acceptable but it happens and people see red and tempers boil over and you think "I'm going to get you back for that, I'll shut you up" and you may notice the usual player whos on the end of a cheap shot is a half back. because that's what good half backs do. they're cocky, gobby and annoying.

If players are willing to give it the big'un they should expect to be dealt with. all the best forwards had/have a nasty streak. Westwood has took pleanty of cheapshots over the years and gets on with it and he'll go toe to toe with anyone. At least hes not been a Ryan Bailey in his career kicking off with backs then $h1i77ing if when faced by somone his own size.

It wasn't a good technique but I'm not sure it was meant to injure. I didn't realise it was illegal but can see why it should be. I don't have any problem with a ban; apart from a few paranoid Wolfs I haven't seen many objections to it.

What, like when he also took Sutty's head off? It was in the first minute, so he didn't have a chance to 'give' anything in order to deserve almost getting beheaded. Sh1thouse, pure and simple.

You really need to lay off the salt

No salt just facts. Proper forwards are Peacock Morley Graham Ellis Walmsley etc Westw@#k is nowhere near.

Get stuck in early doors and let 'em know you're there. It's Rugby League, not tiddlywinks.

TBF to Westwood he knows he's not going to be pulled early in a game so always gets his "freebie" in early doors, id go so far as saying its now so common place its as inevitable as a Sean O'loughlin head high tackle.

I agree with that. It's like Andy Farrell or Ellery Hanley putting in a high shot or holding down. They are more likely to get away with it & it would be a failing not to exploit it.