One thing we can learn from union is how to deal with vicious, cowardly assaults on players, if he was a union player I doubt it would be less than 10 games, more 10 months.

I agree. Rugby league is a very tough sport. At the top level it can be brutal, just look at the state of origin or NRL grand final. What happened yesterday though does the game no favours. A forward punching a half back in the head in that manner. It's like a heavy weight boxer punching a bantamweight from behind when the round has finished and hes walking back to his corner. No one wants to see it and it should be dealt with severely.

There was plenty of cameras, a vid ref and word should have been sent to Silverwood about the seriousness of the incident and a red card shown.

The entire sporting culture in this country is soft. You would think from reading this thread that you were all soccer fans who were watching your first game of rugby league.

Westwood should absolutely be in the team, and he should rough up the opposition too.

You think Aus or NZ wouldn't pick Gallen, Smith, JWH etc because they'll throw the odd cheap shots?

Assuming we don't have a bunch of weak SL refs in charge of our games then the boys are okay to grub it up a little bit. NRL refs turn a blind eye to the dirty stuff in big games, you only have to look at origin or previous internationals to see that (everyone was crying about Issac Luke ankle twist, Tony Williams high shot, Jeremy Smith elbow last Four Nations, if you think back to it. According to SL fans they were all red card incidents even though they only drew penalties)

Was a minor incident. A 1 game ban is fair enough. Forwards having cheap digs in the tackle isn't unheard of. Case in point, I haven't heard anybody mention the fact that number 20 for Wigan went in with a sly closed-fit of his own the next time Westwood took the ball up. Because Westwood wasn't concussed we're supposed to pretend it didn't happen? These things happen frequently, no biggie, it's part and parcel of the sport. Deserves punishment when it goes wrong, that's the risk you take, but it's not the rare act of thuggery it's being made out to be, it just happened to, unfortunately, result in an injury.

The faux outrage from commentators and fans is bewildering. The real controversy is that the so-called medical professionals and referees in charge of the game allowed a blatantly concussed player to play the game. An absolute disgrace. We pretend to be for player welfare, even so far as banning the shoulder charge because of concussion concerns(supposedly), then we give players who are knocked unconscious the green light to get knocked senseless for another 78 minutes. That's the real barbarism that the sport needs to tackle head on.

Fingers crossed Westwood isn't banned for too many games and he can give it to the Aussie and Kiwis, because they won't hold back on our players.

I’m not sure I understand the logic behind this post

Leaving a player on the pitch suffering from concussion after being knocked out is ‘an absolute disgrace’ and yet the act of foul play that led to this concussion gets ‘it's part and parcel of the sport’

Your not the only one.

The video ref can't do that because, quite ridiculously, it would be against the rules for him to inform the referee of an assault he has witnessed.

I'm not quite sure I understand your own logic.

There is no parallel between the two, and as such there is no contradiction.

Because I think that allowing a heavily concussed player to carry on playing a collision sport is outrageous and criminally negligent, it should logically conclude that I hold the same opinion about every tackle or challenge which causes a concussion? You've lost me.

You never know, there are some 'fans' on here who will defend the indefensible no matter what.

Nice User name by the way.

Westwood shouldn't be in the England squad.

Apart from Graham and Roby, the rest of that diabolical 2008 England World Cup squad should never have been selected again.

I couldn't believe the comments I seen from Westwood in my morning paper claiming he didn't know he'd hit Green, then he had the cheek to have a go at Hansen over the Ratchford incident. Is this bloke for real?

Then again, looking at his face, he rather looks like a simpleton.

I've not read that, but that's pretty unbelievable if he has.

Can't quite work out if it's more unbelievable stupidity or just sheer hypocrisy.

He's unlikely to publically admit anything prior to being charged, despite compelling evidence otherwise.

The replay shows Westwood was looking right at Green when he punched him, can't really believe there wasn't intent

Quote ="Guerrier"I've not read that, but that's pretty unbelievable if he has. Can't quite work out if it's more unbelievable stupidity or just sheer hypocrisy.'" You can find the stupid comments from Ben 'the brain' Westwood here... www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/rugby- ... n-ban-fear His cowardly act has no place in this game. It's not as if Green was in a position to give him a slap back.

Quote ="Guerrier"I've not read that, but that's pretty unbelievable if he has. Can't quite work out if it's more unbelievable stupidity or just sheer hypocrisy.'" You can find the stupid comments from Ben 'the brain' Westwood here... www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/rugby- ... n-ban-fear His cowardly act has no place in this game. It's not as if Green was in a position to give him a slap back.

So I assume by your comment not respecting Wire anymore because of this cheap shot mate, you decipher "good rugby" as playing within the spirit of the game and not expansive attacking type play?

If that's that case, you are aware that you have Michael McIlorum in you team. A man who is no stranger to the art of the cheap shot.

However, if you mean "good rugby" as playing expansive attacking type of play, then what does not respecting them have to do with one of Wire's players lashing out?

As for the punch itself, I've had it described to me in great detail and it sounds like he should have been sent off.

EDIT: I've just seen it on Sky Sports News and yeah, he should have gone.

Westwood is a joke. He should just not comment until after the hearing and accept whatever punishment comes his way after.

But to come out and try and deny it when everyone can see on the replays.......the RFL should throw the book at him.

If throwing the book means a Grade B charge with possible 2 game ban then that's what they've done ...,,,

How is wetswoods not a grade d-f?

From the RFL website:

[uWhen tackling or attempting to tackle makes contact with head or neck of an opponent[/u

[iA-B Careless - flat hand off balance
A-B Careless -ball carrier dips
A-B Careless - stepped and reaching
A-B Careless - initial contact with ball or chest
A-B Careless - second tackler in - wrapping tackle up
Reckless
B-C Reckless - tackler in control
B-C Reckless - tried to tackle but reckless about outcome
Intentional
[uD-F Intentional - clenched fist - intent to make contact with head[/u[/i

Ridiculous that it is a B

It just shows our game is run by clueless idiots and needs overhauling, I applaud (if true) the SL chairman who are planning to stand up to the RFL. It shouldn't matter there is a World Cup round the corner, If this was a Gareth Hock or Ryan Bailey they would be both looking at 4-5 games IMO. I'm just glad justice was done in the end with a losers medal for him.

It's an absolute disgrace and shows the RFL for the spineless, gutless morons that they are.

The entire disciplinary is joke.

The fact that friendlies count for bans.
The fact that the ban doesn't count for the competition it occured in.........i wonder why, with a world cup round the corner westwood hasn't received a grade d-f, which by their own guidelines, it clearly is?

I wonder

They've charged him for punching, not a high tackle...And by their guidelines for grading punching it's Grade B isn't it?

If he puts in an early guilty plea does it subtract a day from the higher range as he's pleaded guilty, or can they still decide it's only a one match ban so his EGP will mean he gets nothing? That'd be a joke!

He can't use an EGP as he's used one already

correct its been ruled as a punch and not a punch in a tackle or high tackle with a clenched fist?

funny thing it cant have been a punch as Westwood clearly states that he cant remember it happening and surely he would remember punching someone so it should of been a high tackle with a clenched fist.

I'm assuming all the ones calling for him to get a 184 match ban are the same ones that didn't want him near the England WC squad?

The incident is worth more of a 1-2 match ban, I agree. But the stupid thing is why should the ban count for internationals when the incident occurred in a domestic final? It should count for Super League only.