Fair explanation.
Not sure Fusitua was that tensed expecting the collision and Dwyers was a split second out.
Widdop holds that pass a split second longer and it`s a fair tackle.
All ifs buts and maybes I suppose.

There's no ownership on fus to do anything. You make shoulder contact with the head regardless of mitigation and there's a consequence.

I agree there’s no ownership on Fusitua to do anything but then he’s got to expect collision. Currie hits him with everything but his arms are wrapped around him. It’s not a blatant shoulder charge. This leads to grade A (careless) rather than Grade D (blatant- Napa)

Does that not carry a ban then? Yeah expect collision around his body. Surely there's due care on the tackler to not hit his heat with anything.

Last comment on this.
If your arms make contact between midriff and chest where do you expect the shoulder to be. Not around the players ankles, but between neck and chin.
He got careless verdict Grade A with no matches.
The panel are warning him to go lower or next time expect ban for same grade.
They state it as high contact with no malice.

Get your angles right and I'd expect the shoulder to make contact in the same area ie not the neck or head. Though knocked out and missing a game through concussion I'd be interested to know if the degree of injury sustained would alter the decision on a potential sending off/ban ie a broken jaw from the careless contact. Doesnt make sense to me you're either culpable or you're not.

I don’t think it would but don’t quote me.
Dwyer would of got the same ban if Widdop suffered concussion and missed a match. It’s classed as soft contact but still dangerous because his arms don’t wrap round Widdop and he doesn’t see it coming. Would you expect Dwyer to get 4 matches if Widdop say had fell over from his soft contact and broke his arm. It’s all hindsight.

As difficult as it is because RL is a high paced, high impact and instinct and reactionary related sport but the defender has to have a duty of care and is responsible for the attackers safety.

I genuinely dont think Currie meant to hurt Fusitua i think he meant to wrap him up but his shoulder contacted his head and he is responsible for that.

He shouldve been punished for that i believe.

...that hypothetical broken arm would be from a secondary impact though and not as a direct cause. Anyway, we could go on...

Curries tackle was just a brutal , but brilliant tackle.
Bentleys tackle should just have been a penalty.
Nothing in Dwyers! Games are getting ruined by over zealous rules…..

It looks like you're never going to get the message that if this stuff isn't rooted out there won't be a game any more.

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.

Surprises me that Currie's was not deemed reckless. He has shoulder charged someone in the head causing them to go off with concussion and to miss the next game.

If the RFL are so keen to safeguard against head injuries then surely the onus is on the defender to ensure they do not make contact with an opponents head. There should be no excuse for shouldering someone's head. Tackle lower and you won't knock your opponent out.

Appealing the 3 match ban for the Bentley red card is the worst idea ever. No chance of getting it reduced and will almost certainly be changed to 4 matches. Jake Connor only getting 1 match though is very questionable. Although no clenched fist! He is wrong footed and takes out a player that has neaten him. If Oliver Holmes is deemed a 1 match ban and Bentley 3 then Connor should get 2. Its all very inconsistent.

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.