If Gildart is really out for 3 months I expect Ferres will not be able to fit in a shirt he is going to be out that long!!

Or 2 months. As someone who suffered a similar injury 30 years ago, & still suffers discomfort from it today, I understand the severity of the injury. I don't like Ferres but don't think he meant to injure, just to hurt, if that doesn't sound daft. But he took the risk & should suffer the consequences. 5-6 games for me.

The Roy Keane defence?

Insanity?

bet he is back playing before ferres we all no these medical reports are used to influence the panel.

The cynic in me agrees.

However, you can't defend this indefensible. It's a ban, a very long ban.

No doubts Ferres deserves a ban but i dont think it should be anymore than 4wks saying that Singleton got 6 so i expect BF to get at least the same.

Obviously don't think Ferres meant to injure him, but obviously the aggression was there with the bust up that had just happened with Golding.

The fact is, even without intent to injure, there is a duty of care to players to not put them in that position, as there is with spear tackles etc, and that is where Gildart ended up, and when that happens you are treading a fine line. I don't think he meant to do it, just tackled aggressively and was unable to control it when Gildart kind of backed into the wrong position (not helped by I think it was Delaney coming in 2nd Man and lending weight).

Having said that, I don't think it was as deliberate as Singo's elbow and though Ferres has a worse record, he did get binned. I reckon 5 games is about right.

As an aside, these incidents always seem to bring out the worst in any fans, particularly in the immediate aftermath. The situation is not made any better by the likes of Phil Clarke either.

I doubt it very much. He has fractured three vertebrae.

Agree entirely with that. Gildart seemed to be trying to stay up, gain an extra few metres, Ferres was trying to dominate and it ended badly. I dont think Ferres put him in that position, but he has a duty to prevent him getting in to that position, and if Gildart does get in that position to be careful. He didnt do that. To listen to Phil Clarke tell it, Ferres picked him up off the floor, folded him in to a ball and jumped from a height.

This is a good example though of why i dont think the injury should make a difference. There will be worse offences where nobody is hurt, and nothing offences where players suffer serious injury. Its was lucky that Gildart didnt get more seriously injured, and unlucky he got injured at all.

Agree with this. I don't think any player intends to injure another, and I don't think Ferres did in this instance. However he has a duty of care to Gildart and he should get a decent ban for it. As you say 5-6 games would seem about right though I don't really know what Ferres previous disciplinary record is like.

Looking on RFL website for citings that resulted in charges:

1 match ban in July 09 for dangerous tackle (grade C)
Charge in April 2011 for dangerous contact (which website doesn't give result or grade of)
1 match ban (EGP) in March 2012 for dangerous tackle (grade B)
1 match ban in September 2012 for dangerous lift (grade B)
5 match ban in April 2014 for dangerous throw (grade E)
2 match ban (EGP) in June 2015 for punching
Not guilty in June 2016 or dangerous contact (grade B)

Agree it's unwise to take the injury into account on its own for the reasons you state. Remember Paul Deacon's awful broken jaw and pallet vs New Zealand? Not a malicious tackle just bad luck.

Quote: Bullseye "Agree it's unwise to take the injury into account on its own for the reasons you state. Remember Paul Deacon's awful broken jaw and pallet vs New Zealand? Not a malicious tackle just bad luck.'" It can be and I expect will be taken into account. Section 2.3.4 from the guidelines. 2.3.4 Injury  If the Misconduct has caused injury to an opponent, this may result in a higher penalty than if no injury had occurred.  Panels may consider the length of time an injured opponent is likely to be out of the game when passing sentence. media.therfl.co.uk/docs/On%20Fie ... elines.pdf

Quote: Bullseye "Agree it's unwise to take the injury into account on its own for the reasons you state. Remember Paul Deacon's awful broken jaw and pallet vs New Zealand? Not a malicious tackle just bad luck.'" It can be and I expect will be taken into account. Section 2.3.4 from the guidelines. 2.3.4 Injury  If the Misconduct has caused injury to an opponent, this may result in a higher penalty than if no injury had occurred.  Panels may consider the length of time an injured opponent is likely to be out of the game when passing sentence. media.therfl.co.uk/docs/On%20Fie ... elines.pdf

Yeah I don't agree with injuries making a difference to the length of ban. We could see an identical incident this weekend but through nothing but pure luck the guy gets up and is able to play on and the offending player get no ban or minimal, it's daft. I'm pretty certain earlier this year Briscoe was on the recieving end of a crusher tackle but got up after a brief pause so nothing was made of it.

Cuthbertson was lucky not to suffer a serious ankle/leg injury from Tautai's challenge last year, McGuire likewise from Sneyd's crocodile roll in 2015 and Sinfield fortunate not to suffer a broken jaw/cheekbone from Monaghan nutting him in the GF '12. Because those players were lucky to be able to play on or only missed a single week is a poor excuse not too issue longer bans (or one at all in the latter case).