It will be interesting to see how disciplinary deal with Westwood, who seems to think you can get away with anything in first 10 minutes. IMHO Child's dealt with this incident and many others very badly and the fact that Sutty never returned means a lengthy ban for Westwood or perhaps not!

With the exception they were both deserving of a sending off and a lengthy ban, I fail to see what relevance one has to the other. The Ferris incident was rank negligence, Westwood was far more intentional in my opinion. Both should have left the field immediately and for the remainder of the game.

Will be graded C-D for mine. Depends who is reviewing it. He's probably going to get Easter off.

I agree, and for this reason it's hard to compare the two incidents. For me an intentional offence merits a higher penalty, but when you add in the risk level and injury (assuming, hopefully, that Sutty is back quickly with no ill effects) then the comparison is much harder.

IMO a 4 game ban for Westwood would be about right.

Bad shot, definite red. Expect child to get a week off in the championship, Westwood might get a cpl games off over Easter.

Not sure how Ferris could have being a sending off. No way of interpreting that challenge at the time. He was banned rightly, it still needs a panel to decide on what happened. Westwood challenge was so clear and so shocking, it was an obvious sending off.

I don't think enough has been made of the Sims stamp on Cuthbertson wrist either. It was clear and premeditated. I expect a ban coming his way too.

Ferres decision was complex and pretty much impossible to make in real time.

The annoying thing about the Westwood issue isnt that it was a particularly bad one, but that as a whole it would be so easy to legislate out of the game. Westwood was late, he was high, he swung his shoulder in and he certainly should have gone and should get a ban but in every game kickers and passers are hit late and hit hard and its just unnecessary. They are almost encouraged to launch themselves wildly at a prone player because they then hide behind the defence that they were 'committed' of course they were committed they launched themselves at a player who couldnt defend themselves from 2metres away and had no chance of tackling him.

Contact with the player after he has kicked it automatic 10mins, dangerous contact or high contact automatic red, deal with the severity in bans. It would be out of the game within weeks and the game would be no poorer for it.

Our kickers were hit all night, several shots probably should have resulted in penalties. I am not complaining Warrington deserved the win. Unfortunately we allowed the Warrington kickers all the time in the world. At one stage Patton had so much time he could have autographed the ball.
I think the Simms cheap shot was petulant , can't see him being suspended for that.

Both deserve bans wrt Westwood it was a straight red in real time in slow mo replay & from every angle on the pitch except from the inept Child his Tj's & VR.

westwoods challenge was a shocker and he will deserve the ban he receives but please don't try and go along the lines it's worse than ferres you could argue negligence unintentional but it's not the first time he has don't this and he lifted the player to perform the crusher tackle

Westwood has also not damaged his opponents spine !!! That's right his fecking spine !! To try and compare the two is scandalous we see late high challenges every week we rarely see players with damaged vertabre let alone on a weekly basis

Again westwoods challenge was very bad and I hope barring a headache that sutcliff has no other injuries as a result.

The hit Westwood made could have broken a jaw or worse so I think we need to wait and see before we hang out Ferres and make out is an Angel

I watched it a few times, and although Simms moves his foot towards Cuthbertson, I don't think there's any contact. It'll be a warning Imo.

Im not going to compare the two incidents because im not sure they are comparable or what the point would be, But i would say that a concussion is not a little injury, its not a simple headache. Its other name is Traumatic Brain Injury.

In no way defending Ferres, he got what he deserved, however seem to remember prominent comments about Ferres previous history. Now let me see do the names Blake green and lance hohaia spring to mind?

indeed. wonder when angela powers and phil Clarke will choose to mention anything

Phillip will probably come out with the sort of hand of God garbage he came out with when Magsy got that bad injury at Wigan a few years back. He'll probably think it's Karma against Leeds for what Ferriss did the week before

It was a combination of late,swinging arm,shoulder charge and head contact first. it can't get much worse and has no real mitigating circumstances.

I think generally Wire have a charmed life regarding disciplinary referrals especially when Leeds are the opponents.Briers punch on Ablett,icon_razz.gifaul Wood punching on Ablett Challenge Cup final anyone?Do not expect anything different with this shambles of the RFL disciplinary crew

I don't think the panel has any agenda,just often very random conclusions that don't seem to make sense or match their own previous judgements.

No, no agenda that I can see.But some clubs seem to be treated more equally than others.I was forlornly hoping Ferres would receive a time scale ban deferred until the off season, or Brian Mc to be asked if Ferres would be involved in any England training camps before applying any ban.

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.