Carney would rip Ormsby to shreds, he is still learning his trade. play Bridge and Joel!

Would rather risk Bridge than do that tbh. Bridge & Monas' partnership won us the game last Thursday.

What is the news regarding Bridge?
Not seen anything.

I was down at the stadium earlier, he was warming up seperately from the team. My guess is that we're managing him through training as we are through games, personally i dont think we can rest him, not with the other personnell out at the moment, the only important thing now...is the next game.

Was anyone missing FMC?

Ormsby is in the 19, TS obviously preparing for Bridge not being fit.

That is two Wire full backs "wiped out" by Widnes players. If that wasn't contact with the head then I give up.
If Hock had made that contact, he would have been banned sine die.

But no-one is saying that there wasn't contact with the head, just that it wasn't particularly deliberate or malicious:

"Leuluai was not penalised for the incident at the time and the Rugby Football League's match-review panel have ruled that the player has no case to answer.

The panel's ruling was that the "player makes a legitimate attempt to tackle and makes contact direct to the head of opponent, however opponent is dipping while trying to re-gather ball".

It baffles me that we've had endless debates on these boards about "return of the biff", "hardman enforcers", "game going soft with outlawing of shoulder charges" etc then want to throw the book at the opposition when something happens to one of our guys.

How often is contact with the head deliberate/malicious? "Biff" and dangerous play aren't the same thing.

So, let me get it straight. Matty Russell carried out a vicious attack on the Widnes player's shoulder with his kisser by dipping into the tackle.

The discipline committee must have had there dark glasses on again as you can see that Leuluai clearly dips his shoulder going into the tackle, which for me is a deliberate shoulder charge with the intention of taking Matty out of the game.
Does a player have to get paralyzed or suffer a career ending injury before the RFL clamp down on these instances.
The same goes for the insidious "Cannonball" tackle practiced on a regular basis by a certain team just of the M6, not far from Warrington, if they are losing and can't win by fair means, cripple a player. This tackle is banned in Australia, why not here ?

I say Brady old boy , i'm with you on this , Russell's assault with his head on Leulai's shoulder was inexcusable !

Going back a few years Moz did Big Eorl at Huddersfield with a monster tackle without being any where near his head or neck & it resulted in Eorl not playing any further part. Big hits are a legitimate part of the game but any upper body/neck/head contact that could potentially maim cannot be tolerated & there should be no part in RL for players who practise these methods or coaches who encourage them. Do we really want see players paralysed for life or worse & could players who caused such injuries live with themselves . It is no consolation ,after the act,saying "What happens on the field stays on the field " & wondering why your victim is maimed for life.

The RFL needs to act now ,this is real life not a video game where the victims gets up & walks away !

Potentially only 3 games left, got to go all out now.

If I didn't know better it could look like the Rfl are covering up the ineptitude of the officials. The VR said there was no contact to the head despite having plenty of time to review the footage as Russell was out cold.
If they had correctly identified the contact with the head Widnes would have been a man down, irrespective of intentions/dipping player.
The post match reactions of Carney and Wells summed up the situation perfectly when compared to recent sending-offs.
If there was a ban dished out this week, some awkward questions would have been asked about the effectiveness of the video refs especially as Jon Wells highlighted at half time they had made a mistake with the 2nd Widnes try.....

I agree with bacon. This smells of protecting the ineptitude of the VR involvement. No blame on Thaler he asked them to look and clrarly they were incompetent.

I know we don't like to talk about Union but when the ref goes to the video they also look at the video and then they can make a judgement on the incident themselves, can this happen in league or is it out of the refs hands once it's past on?

Anyone see ask the ref tonight ? Twenty minutes and 4 very Shit non important questions answered and then that's it

I believe once its referred "upstairs" that its out of the refs hands. Personally I would like to see it where the on-field ref simply tells the video ref which angles etc to play so that he can make the decision. Afterall, he is the one who knows exactly what he thinks he might or might not have seen.

Contact with the head is a high tackle and therefore a penalty

TS is quoted by the BBC as saying ..........."I don't want anybody to get into trouble...but I thought it was handled poorly on the day and I think it's been handed poorly ever since." For the full article www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/29341643

TS is quoted by the BBC as saying ..........."I don't want anybody to get into trouble...but I thought it was handled poorly on the day and I think it's been handed poorly ever since." For the full article www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/29341643

He is spot on and how people especially thr rfl are taking the view that there is no case to answer is ridiculous!

Well said Brian Carney and Phil Clarke on Boots n All

Carney was very animated and described the RFL as incompetent.....

Anyone see Backchat? Only person who said there was no case to answer was Stevo - what a muppet!