There was contact with the head, as shown by that picture. So how can they say otherwise. It's a joke, the whole system has been this season for us.

Adam Swift is tackled by someone's knee = out for a couple of weeks and they guy is found guilty and then on appeal is found not guilty?!

Flanagan cannonball tackle = out for the season and not guilty

Was we expecting any different really?

Hardly surprising with your cup semi final coming up.

well if you think that tackle is'nt worthy of a ban you are deluded

It just shows how stupid and inconsistent they are. Gardner got a ban for less. RFL in wigoons pocket as normal.

The picture should be sent to the RFL and ask them to explain their decision. It seems only Saints players are used as testing when these new rules are brought in.

Yep, we called in all our favours for this one. After all, without Taylor we would definitely lose against the London Broncos.

I think you should bypass the RFL and go straight to the police. It was attempted murder.

That picture is a bad angle to make such a decision, you can't see any contact with the head because his head is in the way. O'Brien is on the way down there. I think people re seeing what they want to see with that.

I was screaming for blood at the game, but I've not seen the replay so will reserve judgement, I don't think that the RFL wouldn't have banned him if there was clear contact with the head though, he isn't an important enough player.

I was only joking. But at the end of the day it was a very dangerous tackle. You don't want big forwards putting shoulders into the back/head of players from behind and late. He should have got the same ban the other players who have been banned this season for shoulder charges got.

I don't think it was as bad as that still makes it out to be and whilst the individual desiceion by the panel doesn't concern me, it is odd when you consider Ade Gardner's ban and similar events.

O'Brien was crushed by a similar tackle from Nick Scruton when on loan at Cas. Did Scruton get any punishment?

Lack of consistency.

It's not the worst, but it was shoulder to the head. 1 game should have resulted. Mind you it's not unusual for Wiganers to take out the halfback.

Newton - Long
Hoffman - Wheeler
Taylor - O'Brien

You could argue they are not as bad as they used to be, but the habit remains.

It was a bad one, but had O'brien not collided with his own player he could well have remained on the field - any speculation on the extent of the effects of the shoulder alone is just that, speculation.

The flop onto the unprotected back of "small man" Logan Tomkins as he was regaining his feet to play the ball could have easily resulted in whiplash too and I don't see anyone crying about that. Of course, it was St Paul who did that and he is beyond reproach here.

You obviously don't come on here very often.

the tackle wasnt completed. Had Tomkins played the ball, he would have been penalised anyway for playing the ball before he was tackled.

Someone with a bit of sense. Point of contact was shoulder to shoulder. Watched in slow motion it looked pretty bad, watched again at full speed I'm not sure he could have pulled out. However it was a shoulder charge which is illegal.

There's a fair few on this thread going OTT. IMO he should have been charged with a grade A as although committed he went in with the shoulder rather than effecting a tackle.