I missed the actual tackle the first time I watched the clip, looked more like a bad accident with Shenton folding slightly under the tackle.

From the vid though, he tackles around the hip initially and then kinda slides down with the player. Pretty sure if no injury was sustained it prob wouldnt have even been a warning.

Ah well, thats how they go sometimes.

Think the ban is harsh. There wasn't any intent and from the replays I've seen, he's only making a legitimate tackle IMHO If Shenton doesn't get injured then that doesn't even get reviewed at the disciplinary.

Think he's only been banned because there's been a bit of uproar on social media because a popular player gets injured.

Wish Shenton a speedy recovery and hope he's back playing soon.

This is absolute madness from the judiciary, what are they thinking? Hopefully the appeal succeeds, banning a player for a legitimate tackle just because someone happened to get injured and the coach complained is pure idiocy.

I assume the panel had further video footage that the clip I have see which I thought was inconclusive.
However, injury sustained to the victim has always been a mitigating factor in setting the length of suspensions. Rangi Chase's suspensions following injuries to Brett Ferres and Ropari come to mind, both increased due to injury suffered by the victim.

It's not like he was hitting a standing man and the tackle seems to be around the hips. I feel for Shenton as it's a nasty injury but it looks unfortunate more than nasty.

The severity of injuries has always been taken into account. Nothing new there.

That said, from the (very poor) footage this appears to be nothing more than a clumsy accident. 4 games seems harsh when he didn't seem to do anything illegal, or show any particular disregard for Shenton's safety.

Yeah bad decision, if there are standard punishments in place then they should be followed, the judiciary cant just ignore the rules they created when it suits them or there will be no precedent at all and bans will just be inconsistent.

I see this more and more on the pitch itself.

I've stood near touch judges on the sideline about to do an interchange, someone gets taken out in back play. They weren't even looking, but they then see a player on the deck and wave their flag.

Its always been the case. A head high tackle that doesn't injure someone vs one that breaks a jaw has and always will be treated differently. Otherwise to be consistent you'd have to ban every player that makes a head high tackle for six games or similar, regardless of injury to the opposing player.

Thats wigan screwed then

Regards

King James

i've watched the same video, several times now, and it doesn't look bad at all, he's not coming from the side, he's not pushing against the other defenders or anything, it looks ok, the only thing that bothers me, is that you see boudebza's leg coming all the way round to the front of shenton, which kinda suggests he's got him round the waist and literally dropped all his weight onto the back of shenton's legs. and it reminds me of what rob parker used to get cited for when playing for warrington, where he'd sort of tackle a player from behind then raise his legs up and the ball carrier's legs would then collapse under the weight, he never hurt anyone but the disciplinary kept speaking to him as it had the potential for going wrong.

thats the only thing i can think of they've seen, otherwise its a nothing tackle.

Not surprised at all to see Powell doing his bit post match as judge jury and executioner again like he did against warrington last year.