Ben Thaler, when refereeing Catalans v Saints last weekend sent Tony Puletua off the field for a shoulder charge "making contact with the head"...

The same bloke has just spoken to Silverwood after watching Brent Webb make contact with Washbrook's head (with the elbow it seemed) and lets him stay on the field and escape on report!!

The consistency of referee's is nothing short of a joke and interpretations change week in, week out...about time we got referees (and somebody in charge) who were competent enough to do the job

Totally different incidents for me.

Regardless of the incidents, both made contact with the head, which is the justification for Puletua's red card...how can contact with the head be a red card offence one week and on report the next??

Because the 2nd week involved a Leeds player, therefore the Wakefield player will be suspended for headbutting Webb's elbow.

Both were shoulders to the head. One player dips to make a tackle, the other actually jumps into the tackle. I think the Webb one is worse tbh.

Lets see what happens now...

Right decision both times.

I haven't seen it back so I could be wrong...

Didn't the attacker running at Webb just kick and Webb was therefore jumping to obstruct the kick and the attacker ran into Webb's shoulder more than Webb struck with the shoulder?

I thought that Webbs was much worse tbh, if the board feel the same and he didnt get red he could be looking at a ban.

Still, prob wont matter, his coach pulled him off and Leeds have better players so wouldnt be shocked if he got a time out from the club.

Agree about refs though, need to be more consistant.

It was Webb's elbow that creamed Kirmond.

You are blind then

Maybe he got it wrong last week and was told not to be a merkin in the future?

I don't think the Wakefield cause would have been helped by Webb leaving the field. He's so out of his depth now at Super League level, it's embarasing. The penalty he gave away moments later gave Wakefield the break they neede.
Why does McDermot persists with him and Hauraki?

Webb was a strike to the head of Kirmond and the ref bottled it, even the assistant referee was reluctant to get involved, but finally raised his flag.
Not having seen sky, what communication was given to the ref, did it come from the 4th official, touch judge or, was it the ref ?

lets be honest, Mr Ganson wouldnt have been able to get his red card out quick enough for both webb and wilkes!

Webb's looked bad and if he'd been binned or sent off we couldn't really argue against it, but the fact that he was jumping in front of a kick probably made it a tough decision for the ref. The Wilkes one was far worse IMO, well after the ball had gone, a clear and deliberate attack to the head, no ambiguity in that one and I'm still not quite sure why he was allowed to stay on the pitch. Made Puletua's look like a matey nudge.

Wilkes' hit on anyone else but Burrow would've stuck them in the midrift. It certainly didn't seem like a deliberate attack to the head. Webb on the other hand jumped elbow first into Kirmond face.

McDermott shouldn't be rewarding foul play in that manner.

But it [iwas[/i on Burrow. Are you suggesting that Wilkes thought he was running at Peacock? Is he that stupid? It was late, the ball had gone and the whereabouts of Burrow's head have been well known in the game for more than a decade now, if it wasn't deliberate it was certainly incredibly reckless so please don't try and excuse it by claiming optical illusions or shape shifting on the part of the wee man.

Burrow took the ball right up to the defensive line so is likely to get clattered. All i said is i don't think it was a deliberate attack to the head. Reckless may be and if the RFL concur he will probably get a 1 game ban.

First off you stated that on anyone else it wouldn't have been a head shot, I was merely observing that that is completely irrelevant, secondly Wilkes took two steps after the ball had been passed and clocked him in the head so in that respect the line came to Burrow, and yes Burrow is always likely to get clattered, but not without the ball and not in the face. He could have had a yellow just for the late hit, but if he doesn't cop at least two games for that I'd be very disappointed.

Obviously we will never know but, especially after sending Puletua off, I think Wilkes would have also seen red if they hadnt bottled it before and left Webb on.

Whilst I agree that Burrow is a lot smaller than the average player, contact with his head was still made and therefore should be a red card. The RFL obviously deemed Puletua's to be the correct decision as they gave him a ban, so why just a week later is the same offence not a sending off.

Think we need this clarifying now and it needs to be ruled that any tackle making contact with a player's head is either a sending off or it isnt, as the consistency of decisions (even from the same referee's) is a joke at the moment

I watched the Olympic women's handball last night. There were bigger challenges in a supposedly non-contact sport between girls that went unpunished, that would have resulted in a penalty in Super League. One girl stiff arm tackled someone in the jaw, which would have resulted in a red card for sure under some of the RL refs, and certainly a multiple game ban to follow. She got a 2 minute sin bin and it wasn't mentioned again.

There was nothing wrong with Wilkes on Burrow, there was nothing wrong with the Puletua challenge last week. Yes, we need to cut out the mindless violence and deliberate acts of foul play - but a robust tackle is and should be part of the game.

RL is getting soft.

There was nothing wrong with Wilkes on Burrow, there was nothing wrong with the Puletua challenge last week. Yes, we need to cut out the mindless violence and deliberate acts of foul play - but a robust tackle is and should be part of the game.

RL is getting soft.'"

This.