Quote: Big Jim Slade "That's exactly what I expect if he's incapable of tackling Fusitua legally. The onus is never on the ball carrier to do anything other than hold on to the ball, using this logic it's easy to argue that Widdop shouldn't have been dipping, if he'd been stood upright he'd have forced an illegal tackle to get hit in the head.
The big difference that I can see between the Dwyer and Currie tackles is that one [icould [/i have caused serious injury and the other one [idid[/i cause serious injury. In both incidents the tackler was at fault, in both incidents it was accidental and a touch unfortunate, but they were both cases of foul play and it beggars belief that Currie's has gone completely unpunished.
As for the disciplinary panel suggesting to him that he goes lower next time? Why not just say that to Bentley and let him get away with it as well? It's not like he wanted to hit Widdop in the face. Going lower next time doesn't remove Fusitua's concussion, it doesn't give us a world class winger next week, it doesn't give us the benefit of playing against 12 men for ten minutes. The whole incident has been handled terribly from minute one when the video ref didn't alert Kendall and Leeds didn't take the lad off.'"
I can't understand how between Kendall and the video ref the Fusitu'a incident wasn't put on report. At least then we would have got a penalty.
However, considering Kendall's handling of the match against Catalans in the 2020 play-offs (no penalty for either incident but subsequent 8 match and 6 match bans for Tomkins and McIlorum) we should not be surprised.
I don't for one second believe that Kendall is deliberately biased against Leeds. Unconscious bias though? That is another question.
