Well played tonight. Your team did really well, the fast speed at the play of the ball kept us on the back foot all night and without doubt you were the better team.
So as to not derail a different thread, as suggested by another poster I have begun a new one about the Nick Scruton challenge on Gareth O'Brien. Obviously, if it hadn't been for the fact that Rangi Chase wasn't playing tonight due to a suspension for his shoulder making contact with Zak Hardaker's head (which I agree with), this issue of head-shots maybe wouldn't be so high in my mind. However, what do you think about the tackle?
And as a direct question to Bully Boxer, which part of O'Brien's body do you see in contact with Scruton's shoulder?

It looked fine to me.

Can we talk about the forward pass now?

Just watched it again and it was fine. Ref even asked video referee for his opinion and he said it was all legal. No contact to the head was made by Scruton and it was clearly not deliberate!

Is it just me that sees a little square box where this supposed image is?

The replay is clear to me, contact is shoulder to shoulder the force of which rocks O'Briens head onto the shoulder of Scruton. That is entirely different to a shoulder charge making direct contact with the head.

No I see a little square box too.

Which part of O'Brien's body do you suggest Scruton's shoulder is in contact with?

No, it's not just you.

I agree with your opinion of the tackle. A still image doesn't tell the whole story, and I think this is a reason it isn't accepted at a hearing.

What about the Gilmour head butt on 49 mins.. Six month ban for sure I reckon.

Apologies, I can see the image fine.

It's a head clash is it not? However, if the RFL are going to be consistent it is contact with the head whilst making the tackle, and I don't see why it should make any difference whether it is his arm/shoulder/head.

What's needed are the frames before and the frames after, not a single image that doesn't tell the whole story. These are what would be looked at by the match review/disciplinary panel.

Being from nottingham maybe you should support rugby union. Clearly league is too rough for you. Scrutons tackle was a tad late but he had already committed to the tackle before your lad passed the ball, and from the numerous replays on the bog screen it looked perfectly fine with it being just a big hit.

Unfortunately in Nottingham ice-hockey is the game, which is even more boring than union (just)!
I love the physicality of RL, but it is for this reason that contact with the head needs to be seen as a line in the sand. Over the first few weekends we have seen a numbers of incidents and my fear is that sooner or later someone is going to be seriously damaged and suffer a brain injury if it is not addressed.
Having played at 6 and been the main kicker, I suffered a fair few late head shots that eventually convinced me the game wasn't worth it.

Had there been contact with the head do you not think Ganson of all refs would have picked up on that? He would have been itching to dish out a red just as he was itching to dish his yellows out tonight.

The video referee looked again at the tackle and said there was nothing wrong with it. So that is two main officials who have said it was legitimate one of which had a number of camera angles and could slow it down frame by frame. It is only the cas fans who think scruton has a case to answer for?

It was just a big shot and the lad was unlucky to come off worse for wear from it but he came back on in the second half?

I did notice however when your lad went down there was concern from our fans for him and we applauded him when he got back to his feet and in the next 10-15 mins one of your players pushed blythe i think it was into whitehead causing him to boot him in the head causing whitehead to go down which was followed by a load of cheers from your fans, and then the incident with the smoke can..