An EGP would still have ruled him out of Wire away. Must have thought it was worth a shot. Obviously not!

He's almost as big a liability as Hock was

He can't use it later now that he has got a ban. Nothing unusual for Saints fans not to know the rules.

Isn't he a Leeds lad ?

Only when it suits Leeds fans to say so....

Nothing unusual for Wigan fans to try to bend the rules either

Quote ="AJR"3 match ban and £300 fine from RFL on twitter'" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/26533962 for an extra £700 you can swear on a stage. Nice to see the RFL proirities.

Quote ="AJR"3 match ban and £300 fine from RFL on twitter'" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/26533962 for an extra £700 you can swear on a stage. Nice to see the RFL proirities.

Prior to Sunday he must have kept out of trouble for over 12 months or else wouldn't have been allowed an EGP.

Last time he was up before the disciplinary was after he was sent off against Saints in last game of 2012 (the Joining Jack shirts game)

And who knows if he hadn't missed the playoff agsainst Leeds we might have won. I wonder if the penny will drop with him. He did well all of last season, stayed on the field and we got the double. We really need all of our senior players available this year as there are so few of them.

He played for Qeens which may or may not be the reason he keeps losing his marbles , but it would be a shame if he finishes up with a reputation of a thug instead of the talented player he is .

Fans can't bend rules.

I dont know what videos of the Dixon incident Wigan fans have seen but here is one posted by a Cas fan which looks pretty conclusive.

[urlhttps://vine.co/v/MqPHPZp0vrD[/url

thats the carbon copy of Morley on McCormack in 1998, he didnt get sent off either

Watch boots'n'all if you get a chance watch the referee after the tackle. He clearly points and says shoulder. That is why he gave a penalty and no send off or on report. It's also why it was graded as reckless rather than deliberate. Obviously and correctly his previous has been taken into consideration hence 3 games rather than 2.

Thats from the Wigan TV camera, and if you call seeing McIlorum back conclusive then your right

. at no point from that does it even look high never mind conclusive.

Are you serious? That is an awful tackle. The reaction of the Cas players tells you all you need to know.

Yeah, because refs always judge things perfectly. The reaction of the Cas players shows you what they thought about the "tackle" from a front on view.

Anybody who has watched MM play knows that he is more than capable of deliberate malice, even Wigan fans if they are honest with themselves.

if you can McIlorum making contact with the head then you need to go and work in border control you will be worth a fortune as you must have X-ray vision.

yeah we might as well do away with the video ref if we are going of players reactions every try must be a try

Micky MaC is a tough intimidating player, he is also a very talented player. He crosses the line sometimes.

If you remove that aggressive streak in him you lose some of his effectiveness.

All aggressive players tend to be fans favorites at their own clubs and villains to opposition fans.

Skerrett, Nickle, Newton, Foggerty, Forber, Davidson, Tuuta, Ian Roberts, Paul Harrigan, etc etc etc

Despite the attempts to over sanitise the sport rugby is at a base level an aggressive contact sport and characters like those listed above and many more before and since will always thrive in that environment. It's the nature of the beast and when they do boil over they receive the adequate punishment. No need to go OTT on the issue.

When I watch it I see a player making a ludicrously uncontrolled tackle, a group of obviously incensed Cas players who saw it front on, and a player with a broken jaw.

But yeah, I'm sure there was no contact with the head.

I see Saints have made a good start to the season.....

Just to help you out here because you are obviously struggling a little to understand.

[uNo-one [/uis suggesting that he didn't hit his head.

The poster was referring to the ref's decision AT THE TIME. He couldn't very well diagnose a broken jaw on the spot now could he? He thought the first contact was shoulder, Therefore he gave MMc the benefit of the doubt and just gave a penalty. Now, we know that was an error and that in fact he probably should have got sent off - just as most people on here have admitted.

Your rather pathetic attempts to stir the **** do you no credit. This as 'jonh' has eloquently stated above is a non issue (apart from for Kirk Dixon of course). Move along.

Quote ="Aboveusonlypie"Just to help you out here because you are obviously struggling a little to understand. [uNo-one [/uis suggesting that he didn't hit his head. The poster was referring to the ref's decision AT THE TIME. He couldn't very well diagnose a broken jaw on the spot now could he? He thought the first contact was shoulder, Therefore he gave MMc the benefit of the doubt and just gave a penalty. Now, we know that was an error and that in fact he probably should have got sent off - just as most people on here have admitted. Your rather pathetic attempts to stir the **** do you no credit. This as 'jonh' has eloquently stated above is a non issue (apart from for Kirk Dixon of course). Move along.'" Exactly, I still think he hits the shoulder first as Dixon falls into the tackle. However, it was still reckless and he deserves what he got AND it's perfectly in line with the guidelines. It was reckless rather than intentional and that's why it was graded as such media.therfl.co.uk/docs/On%20Fie ... -Final.pdf Section 2.5 (15.1b)

Quote ="Aboveusonlypie"Just to help you out here because you are obviously struggling a little to understand. [uNo-one [/uis suggesting that he didn't hit his head. The poster was referring to the ref's decision AT THE TIME. He couldn't very well diagnose a broken jaw on the spot now could he? He thought the first contact was shoulder, Therefore he gave MMc the benefit of the doubt and just gave a penalty. Now, we know that was an error and that in fact he probably should have got sent off - just as most people on here have admitted. Your rather pathetic attempts to stir the **** do you no credit. This as 'jonh' has eloquently stated above is a non issue (apart from for Kirk Dixon of course). Move along.'" Exactly, I still think he hits the shoulder first as Dixon falls into the tackle. However, it was still reckless and he deserves what he got AND it's perfectly in line with the guidelines. It was reckless rather than intentional and that's why it was graded as such media.therfl.co.uk/docs/On%20Fie ... -Final.pdf Section 2.5 (15.1b)

I replied to a quote referencing the video footage, but thanks anyway.