Looked to produce a fairly carbon copy of wellens and lafranchis tackles from last week. Will be interesting to see if he also gets a ban.

He will for sure and so will hohaia.

His was worse than Laffranchis. He came down almost vertically and he drove it down. The rfl will not do a thing no doubt.

Was a penalty given for Laffranchi tackle last week?

God you have a blinkered view, the legs were barely verticle and the only the reason the legs went slightly above verticle was due to Hansen coming in on the upper body. The tackle to the letter of the law may get a ban but it certainly wasnt dangerous. Normally id put such stupid blinkered remarks down to a few post game sherberts then i saw who posted and take it it as standard as someone who really has no clue about anything RL

No I don't think so. Saying that the Wigan player deserves two for that one he did as it was far worse.

As the previous poster mentioned I think Hansen made it worse than it was going to be, but McIlorum shouldn't be lifting in the first place. Any player who has to appear before the disciplinary on a 1-2 match ban, will just make the guilty plea and miss the cup weekend, no great punishement there.

Right, my thinking of that then, if wello and Laffranchi both didn't concede a penalty as it wasn't seen by the ref but both copped a ban, then why did Bentham not send the Wigan player off?

He seen it, he awarded and penalty and (I think) put it in repor so if he seen it and these type of tackles warrant a ban then he should have been sent off.

Is there not a weekend disciplinary, therefore he'll be banned for Monday?

According to the RFL's website its on Wednesday/Thursday and covers both lots of fixtures.

any player can lift legs horizontally to make the tackle and if a second player comes in and applies pressure to the upper body physics say the legs will go above verticle. No malice or intent in the tackle from either player but the RFL will probably ban Mike despite not really doing anything wrong. Are we really gonna get to a point where a player is afraid to lifts legs incase the pressure applied to upper body from a 2nd player causes the legs to go above horizontal. There needs to be some common sense applied and intent needs to play a part in the decision The fact the legs are above horizontal does not make a tackle dangerous

no comments on how he was the best hooker on the field?

Agree with that

It sure looked like intent to me and that wasn't what happened.
He could have let go before the legs went above the "verticle".

your interpretation is different to mine then but im not gonna spend endless entries trying to change your mind. Mike did nothing wrong, Hansen's inclusion made the legs go above horizontal after Mike had lifted them to make the tackle. If thats intent maybe you should go watch wendyball. Im sure the melodramtic view would be welcomed

it wouldn't your a saints fan who had just lost to wigan and he was one the best players on the field.

McIlorum was the best hooker on the field today, and by some way.

was this tackle 2 mins after being warned about persistent penalty's ? and the ref kept his cards in his pocket

Blame the ref....... He hurt my ears with his whistle every time we scored a try....

I thought this was going to be about how Micky Mac out Robied Roby

He's not even the best 9 in the wigan side

today he was the best 9 on the field. twice hes been the best hooker against saints whilst starting.

McIlorum won't, or shouldn't be in trouble, as if you check the replay, you will see that he couldn't be 'lifting' due to when the "dirty deed" was done. His feet were off the ground !

How can you lift if your feet aren't on '[iterra firma[/i' ?

Surely that defies the laws of physics?