Seriously ask yourself how easy is it to dive and punch someone when the other person is diving too, David Haye couldn't have landed that if he tried in those circumstances, it was just pure bad luck for both players.

IT DOES NOT MATTER IF HE DIDN'T INTEND IT.

Jeeeeez.

So we shouldn't send a player off for a malicious and dangerous attack to the head because it might spoil your fun.

Spoken like someone who's never played the game at any decent level!

Actually it does, he sent him off for the INTENT.

He chose to "knock the ball out" with a closed fist. so if he got it wrong there was no option for the ref, If it was a slap with open hand it would have been a yellow at worst.

So your saying that Raynor accidentally clenched his fist and swung recklessly at an opposition player with zero regard for the consequences to his victim if he got it wrong?

So your saying that Raynor accidentally clenched his fist and swung recklessly at an opposition player with zero regard for the consequences to his victim if he got it wrong?

At that speed i don't think he thought anything but stop a try being scored.

He's played the game long enough to calculate the odds of taking the action he did even at that pace. While there's an element of instinct in that speed of decision making, players at that level do know what their doing before they do it.

It was an accident, nothing more.

You're giving Raynor far too much credit. This is the guy that spent time inside for selling fake ink cartridges.

Anyway, back to the game... Royston is having a good un

In your opinion!

In my opinion it was one of the worst and most cowardly malicious attacks to the head I've seen for some time.

There's no place for it in today's game and players who perpetrate that kind of attack should be shown the door.

I think the red card was correct but I think he tried to swing his arm and hope to knock the ball out of Tomkins hands but got it wrong as Sam dived and caught him high.

Clearly!

Obviously Raynor should have predictied the dive and trajectory of it.

I'm just checking, but according to some people's logic if a player misjudges their actions, they shouldn't be held responsible for the consequences??

Only Raynor knows what he intended, but that fact remains he did what he did and the outcome was unacceptable. Ganson had no option.

You clearly don't understand his point do you.

Funny, Wigan fans didnt use that argument when defending Jeff Lima's attack on Chris Clarksons knee.

Apparently, according to Wigan, it was because Clarkson 'just happened to fall the wrong way' maybe Tomkins 'just happened to fall the wrong way'

He may have been holding an ink cartridge in is hand.

What point do you think he was making?

Did Horatio Yed watch the same game and incident as me? He contacted the head when the arm was outstretched before he launched himself. If he'd have been playing at the ball, then he'd have missed the head by about a yard.

Deliberate foul, definate sending off and should have been a penalty try too. Can't remember many clearer cases for an eight pointer. Surprisingly close result too, considering that Bratfut were the supposed whipping boys and were a man down too.

Thought the yellow card was a bit harsh though.

Can somebody clarify this for me

Ganson asked for the video refs view as to whether contact was made with the head, can you ask for that feedback to then send somebody off from the video ref? I've never seen that before on TV games and it seemed a bit strange.

You can go to video ref for pretty much anything and because it was related to the try yes you can. He needed to check whether it should have been an 8 point try.

Raynor very clearly intended to hit the ball carrying arm, Tomkins started to go down as Raynor swung, and he ended up hitting his head. If the contact had been with the ball or the carrying arm he would have saved a try. Whereas he could have no imaginable reason to punch Tomkins in the head.

Of course his bloody fist was clenched, he was swinging it to hit the ball/arm, it's not pat-a-bleedin-cake! Why on earth would he try to hit the head, and not the ball/arm? It would make no sense.

The decision to send off was correct, as it was a risky effort, and you pay the consequences for the results of your actions. Say what you want, but for me
a) correct decision
b) no intent, but did make contact with the head
c) a reckless challenge
d) 2 game ban

At first I thought the red card was harsh but seeing the contact made it is probably the correct call however I agree Rayners intentions were probably to dislodge the ball and not attack the head. Unsure as to why no penalty was given after the conversion but that's tomorrows fish and chip paper now.

The yellow was a tad harsh but the amount of penalties given away before that the Wigan discipline needed punnishing and I think that action worked for the rest of the match.

Wigan just about deserved the result but were far far from the form they've shown in the last 5 games, hopefully they'll be on a slump for another 8 days!!!