For me it was not Head but it was a Red .

Problem is some will be sending offs and others on Report and that is where the issues are

May be quicker to name who is availible rather than who is not

He may well be , but it did not change the game in our favour

Often the case and it's one of the game's bigger weaknesses. I won't pretend to understand why the VR can't be better used to root out serious foul play yet is given licence to fart about for all manner of lesser incidents.

The system yesterday worked as it should have. Thaler consulted the video ref who confirmed it was as bad as it was, leaving the on field officials with not much choice than to confirm a red card. It's worthy of 3 or 4 matches in my view.

Quite why there was no intervention by the video ref on the Mcilorum incident last year remains very puzzling and frustrating.

Doesn't the ref need to ask? Rather than the VR butt in

A red was correct but I don't think it should be more than a 2 match ban. It was a late shot with force and because of the force of the impact, he struck his head, albeit not intentional.

Was a penalty but no more.
Ruined the gane that decision. Player wasn't injured, yes was a late hit, but that happens in heat of battle.
As others said, at least 4-5 more hits like that in this game.......

Lets see what the disciplinary panel give.I didn't see 4 or 5 late hits on players without the ball?

Absolute drivel. It was a clear red card and a 3 match ban IMO. I didn’t see another hit like it in the game.

Eastmond has to play against Wigan surely.

I always thought the late hit should have been banned and not the shoulder charge. My only complaint about the red on Saturday is the consistency. I'm all for it being a red card offence if they apply it regularly.