We are probably guilty of thread drift here, but in my opinion, any interference was marginal and accidental at best, he was contesting the ball. A bit like the sending off (see how I get things back on track!

), if we start calling that a no-try, then we might as well go to touch rugby as players will be scared to make any sort of contact. Two poor decisions in my opinion, both made by Ian Smith.

I dislike the shoulder charge tackle, it is very dangerous and can be a cause to serious injuries. It is part of the game and I don't expect to see it outlawed but trialling the system they have in RU might not be the end of the world.

Just a suggestion.

No, I agree that it was a harsh red card, but there's no point people arguing that there was no contact to the head when there was.

I've just watched the game back again and the evidence is inconlusive. Yes, the Dragons' player's head goes back but that could have been as a result of the impact. Looking at the movement of TP's arm, it begins in the chest and moves upwards. But even so, from the angles offered by all the replays, actual contact with the head is not definitive.

It doesn't need changing. What needs changing is the people involved in officiating the game. Those people are in those positions simply because they put their hand up to do it. They have no competences that make them suitable and they are not high calibre individuals.

The shoulder charge tackle is fine. If it's done maliciously to attack the head I agree, it should be a red and a ban. But TP planted his feet and was physically stronger when the Catalans player ran into him, he didn't attack the head and contact was only made with the head because TP made his body bigger than the ball carrier who leant into it with his head.

What did my head in about the incident on Sky was their faux outrage at the tackle. They've worshipped players in the past for worse tackles, Burgess on Frodsham for example, Stevo climaxed on air, countless big hits by Sam Burgess, including the one on Moi Moi. They were all championed as awesome tackles, yet were far worse. Adrian Morley, who the Sky team adore has made a career out of his big hits.

I disagree, it serves no purpose in our game

It's takes no skill what so ever (it's not even a tackle) and can cause serious injury

Have you ever played? It adds excitement and it looks great and it does take some skill because if you get it wrong you end up on your backside looking very silly or worse still you get stood up and the opposition shows you a clean pair of heels

So I bet you were outraged when Ryan Bailey knocked Maurie Fa'asavalu out then? Or when Burgess smashed Moi Moi?

Watch it a bit further on and you'll see the player on the receiving end walking off with a busted nose. I'd take that as evidence of there being contact with his head, unless he just happened to get a nose bleed for no real reason at that point in time...

But even if his blooded nose was the result of contact to the head, it doesn't automatically follow that it was TP who made that contact. He could have just as easily busted his nose on impact with the floor, assuming his nose wasn't busted prior to that tackle. I can't say I noticed one way or the other myself.

He didn't take the rest of the worlds word for it

He got it in the face , but it was his own daft fault.

Super League is becoming far too sanitised. Rugby league is a collision sport. The shoulder charge is legal and for me a great spectacle when you see the hits. Tony put in a superb hit and yet again Thaler sends a man off. The fight we had with yourselves, 3 sent off for a few punches. Disgraceful. Its part of whats made our game great. The big hits, the biff but now players will be far too scared to get involved through fear of being sent off. I subscribed to Premier sports this year and watch approx 5 games of NRL a week. There are far bigger shots and more regular every game that are celebrated rather than punished. At this rate in 5 years we'll be playing touch and pass. The sooner Cummings go's the better because all the excitement is slowly being drained out of the game and its the reffereeing standard thats killing it not the players.

The changes they are making to the rules in the NRL and SL are simply bringing consistency by making contact with the head illegal, and - as it always should have been - the responsibility of the tackler to avoid. The reason for the change is down to possible future legal action. Its all very well players being gung ho about shoulder charges when they're young and fit, but given the medical evidence about the long-term consequences of hits to the head, the sport would be laying itself open to all kinds of law suits down the track if despite that evidence it didn't penalise players hitting the head.

The shoulder charge itself isn't being penalised - contact with the head is.

I've never understood the complete inconsistency that its apparently 'bad' to swing your arm into someone's face, but OK to hit someone square in the face with your shoulder, including all your body weight behind it. Suggestions that the game is going soft if that sort of contact is banned are ridiculous - how many shoulder charges are there during the average game? How many actually come off? They may look spectacular, but given the potential for injury (including to the tackler for those that do it regularly) and the high chance of being penalised or simply missing completely, I suspect coaches frown on them now.

Nobody is saying you can't go for a big hit, just that if you hit someone in the head then it is likely to be a penalty at least. If the tackler can't avoid smashing someone in the head then that's bad technique, just as a swinging arm is.

In theory I would agree...although how many times in a game do we see tackles where contact is made with the head, a penalty is given but no sending off?

If you bring the rule in that any contact with the head is a sending off, it means any time there is a high tackle (even just a lazy arm or accidental contact like TP on Friday) it would result in a red card and it would spoil our game totally!

Just to play Devil's advocate, when Saints played Leeds at Headingley, Kevin Sinfield made contact with Tom Makinson's head, leaving him knocked out and requiring a stretcher from the field. Does that mean that Sinfield should have also been sent off?

Just seen the TP hit, i cant believe they even gave a penalty for that.... Shockingly soft, like the red cards for the millenium magic fight. What is our game becoming... Back chat to referees, no physical contact, this is like La Liga.

TP has been charged with a grade B offence which carries a 1 or 2 match ban. If he pleads guilty then he will probably get one match

Grade B offence! Well if it's got this far it pains me to say it but he may be told by Saints to plead guilty and take the 1 match and lose him for Hudds, then back and rested for Wire.

However as far as I'm concerned he has no case to answer. Great shoulder charge, plain and simple, bad technique from the attacker. Running in head first against a bigger guy.



Busting his nose on TP's shoulder doesn't mean TP did anything wrong. It will be a disgrace if TP has to plead guilty when he is not a dirty player and never has been.

Just ask yourselves one question. If Gareth Hock had done an identical challenge what would your reaction be?

There is no doubt that TP is a clean player however when contact with the head is made like that it is a red card offense. I enjoy watching a big hit as much as anyone else but it's the tacklers responsibility to make contact below the neck. TP on this occasion did not do that and rightly got his marching orders.

If Hock did an identical challenge then my reaction would also be identical, i.e. nothing wrong with it, not even a penalty. The reason my reaction would be the same is that I am not a biased, blinkered, deluded fool.

You are either as I have described above, or a troll who needs to get a life. Either way, you're wrong.

How is it that Michael McIlorum gets sent off for punching Elima in the face (surely an attack to the head?), has had previous sendings off on his record and gets away without a ban for an early guilty plea, yet TP with no prior red cards on his record hits somebody with his shoulder and will still get a match ban (even with a guilty plea)?

Not sure how it works but surely that is wrong?? What message does that send out, punch people and its OK but get a shoulder charge wrong and we ban you for 2 games??

Ridiculous and once again shows a lack of consistency by the RFL!!

1) When were these sending offs?

2) Then your post is self explanatory.

He got sent off against Saints a few years ago.

He did in [i2008[/i.
Hence he was allowed the early guilty plea in 2012.

If it had happened in the last twelve months he would not have been allowed it.

As I said on page 2 of this thread, let the disciplinary sort it out, they are neutral.

It wasn't even a shoulder charge. It was a block. Mounis ran at TP. TP was still.

It's also ok to knock someone out with a swinging arm, as Sinfield did to Makinson when we played them at Leeds, causing Makinson to be carried off. That was just a penalty.

All this inconsistency is making the game look corrupt, when you compare the shoulder charge tackle of Ryan Bailey who is 3rd man in jumping 2 feet off the ground into Big Mauries head.
TP who stands his ground and leads with the shoulder on impact, if the club feels there is no case to answer then they should plead not guilty and take the video of the Ryan Bailey flying shoulder charge as a comparitive standard.