To be fair I think the Minichiello accusation comes from Chinese whispers on the forums. Most people know it happened against Hull and someone got the player confused.

Anyway, look up "Wigan Warriors vs Hull FC rugby 13.05.2016 | Super League rugby 2016" on YT, at 1:20. I agree it certainly doesn't appear to be deliberate although Clubb understandably isn't happy and is immediately in some distress.

And yes it was a 9-month injury, which included an operation in which his throat was cut open to insert a metal cage in order to ease stress on a couple of bulging discs - all from that crusher.

Nothing like that fat faced grub Ferres and his despicable attitude towards fellow players, which has raised its ugly head before both on and off the field. Horrible man. Fits right in at Leeds I hear.

Well I know people won't agree but I have an issue with the length of the ban. Not because of intent/carelessness etc which is a mitigating factors for and against depending on your point of view but simply because we have to stamp out any practice which puts undue pressure on the neck or spine.

Clubb and Gildart could quite have easily had their careers ended and past cases have shown that statement isn't an over reaction.

If we are seeing X game bans for late high shots and attacks to the leg then we need to be seeing X+4/5 bans for any challenge that put extreme pressure on the neck and spine. This goes for any player on any team.

Sorry, my algebra is a little rusty.... If X is 1, is that a 1 game ban, or 1 game and 64 minutes ban you're proposing?

Sorry, I'm terrible at explaining myself on forums.

What I'm trying to say is the fact that it was neck/spinal injuries caused by the foul doesn't seem to be taken into account. Just this year Singleton got 6 games for the elbow, we have seen Chase get 7 games for attacking a lower limb and Flower 6 months for that 2nd punch.
I don't want to get into how much the above were deserved but considering how incredibly vulnerable the neck and spine is I think there should be much higher bans for tackles which cause damage (or risk causing damage) to these areas compared to others. intended or not they simply have to be stamped out completely.

p.s. X is 10 in roman but in this case i was using it algebraically

it would be nice if a poster isn't sure who was involved in a potentially illegal tackle or incident could just say something like 'a hull fc player' instead of erroneously naming a specific player. if it wasn't for a certain poster commenting, the false allegation against MM could have remained on here. sooner or later i can see action taken against this forum and that could be the end of it.