So anyone swinging a fist, missing the ball by 2 feet & knocking the opposition player out should just get a yellow?

No, but you've got to take it into context...When a player is diving in for a try and cannot be tackled the defender should aim for the ball carrying arm.

Unfortunately he missed.

yes, he missed but he punched tomkins in the head and knocked him out. that's the risk he took and he ended up sent off. just how it goes.

So he should have stood there and done nothing?
And had he not knocked him out - then what? No charge?

Lynch should have gone down against Halifax then...

Exactly. No consitency.

I'm not sure what you are suggesting the correct decision should have been regarding this incident at all, or you just upset that a Bulls player got sent off? Raynor swung his fist recklessly; I will give him benefit of the doubt & believe he was aiming for Tomkins' arm. He missed & knocked him out cold. Now you either think that warrants a red or not. I would put it to you, how tolerant would you be if a convicted thug, racist & crook knocked a Bulls player out cold?

Correct decision would be on report. I don't automatically assume that if someone is knocked out it has been done maliciciously and therefore a red card is needed. Players get knocked out in tackles a lot.

As for convicted thug, racist, crook comment? Not sure what you mean. I am sure that I am not blinkered enough to see that it might have been an accident.

If raynor just stood there, how many fans would of said why didn't he try knock the ball out? why did he just stand there and let him through.

I was thinking of parallels with Ryan Bailey. Raynor's action had a far worse result then anything Bailey has ever inflicted (illegally). I wonder where Bulls fans' sympathies would be if Bailey, convicted thug as we are oft reminded, was involved.

fans from both sides have spouted some tripe about this. Unintentional attack to the head, player knocked out, sending off sufficient and that should be the end of it. I dont agree with the wigan fans calling for ridiculous bans, and i dont agree with the bradford fans saying he milked it. It was a badly timed tackle end of, imo the red was correct and thats where it should end.

I agree with that.

He probably was intending to try and knock the ball out (otherwise I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would be stupid enough to do that). It's alright doing that, but the responsibility is then on you to make sure that swinging fist that you're aiming at the ball connects with it, or the air. If you accidentally clobber someone in the head with it, you can't really argue with a red card IMO.

But considering he missed 50 minutes of the match and it probably cost us the game, combined with the benefit of the doubt that he was trying to knock the ball out and not Mr. Tomkins, then I'll be disappointed if it's more than Sending Off Sufficient.

It was unfortunate incident, a mixture of poor timing and technique. I have to be honest and say that for me it was the right decision, if a Wigan player had done the same we would have expected him to be sent off. I don't for a second think that Raynor went in with intent but I don't think Ganson had any choice.

Going down to twelve obviously didn't help us but to be fair Wigan struck the killer blows when it was 12 vs 12 at the start of the second half. No excuses on the day but it was a much much better performance, lets hope it's the turning point for the season.

This.

And that, in a nutshell, is it. no intention to hit the head, intention to hit the ball/arm, but serious contact with the head therefore reckless and a fair enough sending off, in the sense I can understand it, although in 99% of cases it would have just gone on report.

The fact is that often the consequences of what you do are a factor. Had the blow been a couple of inches higher and glanced off, and had Tomkins immediately jumped up celebrating, Raynor would not have walked.

What is it about us and video refs, though? First, does the VR have the authority to send a player off? A first to me. Second, as has been said, there is no way on earth Ganson was going to send Raynor off. Have we got/do we want a system where the VR has full authoprity to rule on on-field incidents, not just tries, 40-20s etc., and if we have, is it only Bradford where the VR calls the shots? or does anyone have any other examples?

At least here, unlike the unbidden decision at MM, Ganson had asked the VR for his opinion, I suppose.