Good post.

Conspiracy theory alert! At the time nobody knew if Catalans were even going to be involved in the million pound game. Presumably you were one of the people who said the London Broncos would never be allowed to be relegated from SL either?
I've read the full, detailed report on the appeal to me, which explains the panel's thinking. I reckon it could have gone either way, it was a bad tackle and deserved a ban, 3 to 4 games looks about right to me. For me the Mata'utia incident was marginally worse because he lifted the ball carrier with both hands from behind in a manoeuvre that wasn't really any kind of normal tackling manoeuvre, but I could see how you might argue it either way. But this is a judgment call, not an example of "inconsistency".

Agree re judgement call.Watching the Leigh game as a neutral i was disappointed it was more than a sinbin as all he appeared to be trying to do was stop an offload.It just became dangerous whereas Bird knew what he was doing.Also can't understand the mentality of calling the ref a cheat when the game was long gone anyway.

Watching the Origin last night was first time i thought the 2 ref idea wasn't gimmiky.No-one dropping ball on purpose or poking ball out on ref's blindside was a pleasure to watch.

The first thing I advise is.
Stop “presuming” what other people did or think.
I have never commented on what would or wouldn’t happen to London.
However since you raised it the RFL were clearly inconsistent regarding the rules where London were concerned with one set of rules for them and one set of rules for everyone else.
No conspiracy, no presumption, it was all done out in the open for years, fact.

Rather than doing anything to make people think the RFL are not capable of manouvering things when it suits them, London does the exact opposite and hardly strengthens your argument or Featherstones chances.

Back from presumptions.

I completely disagree on your assessment that the PM tackle was marginally worse because of where the lifting started from, which has nothing to do with the outcome.
Risk assessments = likelihood x severity or harm, I used to write them for years in a heavy construction industry.

In the case in question the severity or amount of harm is the important factor.
Also where the person being lifted finishes before being dropped will affect the above outcome.
The more vertical and the less support increases the likelihood and greater amount of potential harm, BH clearly looks worse.

As stated Kendal sent off PM and not GB, judgement call or not it has to be consistent and that was not the case.

Obviously a bad call from Dawson. His frustration clearly came from being obviously impeded by the guy playing the ball, and Kendal refusing his TJ's advice to have a look at it for obstruction. No excusing Dawson, but ironically, had the ref chosen to involve the VR, like he did for ALL Leigh's tries, then Dawson wouldn't have said anything.

Still, he did, and got his just desserts!

Classic comment response in the first paragraph, when you can’t reason on it just dismiss it and throw in an insult.

Then make a point about people having different opinions yet when they differ from yours it’s a leap to understand.

Sounds inconsistent to me, no wonder you struggle with it.

It’s not really that hard, during a game player “A” picks up player “B” and from a dangerous position drives / drops him headfirst into the pitch clearly visible to all on any given day in any given match and it’s a red card, that’s consistency.
Surely not too much to ask for is it?

This Topic is going round in circles we all agree to disagree

I predict a Leigh win by 10 points, hopefully !

Our squad looks as strong as possible with Moss,Green,Maher and Grix all in.

Bet JWH isn't too happy

Thought same,tough call but his time will come and IMO it's correct call.

No Will Sharp, is he injured?

Still injured missed Batley too.