This is an argument I made when the big uproar came about high tackles etc, there will be far more injuries with players tackling lower, as is proven here, 2 fantastic tackles - but they have a much higher chance to cause serious injury than a tackle around the shoulder which we are now outlawing!!!

I bet you've had one more than me terneet.

Anyroad, It's beddy byes fer Cokey now. Gud neet mucker

It’s rare I agree with Wilkin and even rarer I agree with the Sad one.

This technique (if that’s an appropriate word) needs to be banned at the first opportunity. It’s not tough, it’s at best reckless and at worst malicious. The defender is not in any sort of control and flinging themselves at lower limbs.

For one player to do it causing 4 injuries in one game to me suggests in that case, it’s more malicious than reckless. After all the publicity, the medical evidence and 2 serious injuries caused, that same player does it again the following week pretty much proves that player is quite happy with the result of their ‘technique’. Anyone who wasn’t would have made sure they didn’t do it again the following week.

Bell was just as bad, I can accept in a single instance that the player likely just got it wrong rather then went on with malice. Most players will get it wrong now and again.

The RFL need to look at this in the off season and come up with suitable wording that outlaws tackles of a reckless nature but doesn’t outlaw a good, controlled cover tackle.

Chicken Wings, cannonballs etc we’re all legal at one point. It doesn’t mean they were ever right. ‘Tackles’ like this make me cringe,

Bingo.

That much, well said!