Go Widnes. Great game so far. Needs a good half time talk from Smith

Unlucky for Macgraf Lieuluai but I think that's a penalty to Warrington.
Even though it's unlucky and unintentional there is heavy contact to the head of Russell, nothing more than a warning about technique and a penalty but certainly not a knock on by Russell

What are you watching? Of course it was a knock on, for the simple reason he knocked it on. That's why he ended up in such an exposed position.

Huge collision but unfortunately just one of those things that can happen in a high speed collision sport. Hope he's ok.

Warrington were already thinking about the semis v Wigan/saints when it kicked off. Few early tries for widnes gave them something and made it a battle. Warrington slowly pulled themselves out of the slumber and got a scruffy win.

Better way to start the playoffs than a walk in the park against a team that stocked up on lube.

Widnes lost that themselves. They let Warrington back into the game with some awful game management decisions; stupid passes, penalties, etc. that a more experienced play-off team wouldn't have made. Kev Brown was anonymous in the second half.

You need to go away, read and learn the rules, when two incidents occur it is the more serious one which takes precedence. While it's plain to see that Russell has lost the ball forward there is heavy contact by MLs shoulder to MRs jaw and cheekbone. Therefore it's a penalty for contact to the head, what's so hard to understand?

Don't give me that MR was falling, stooping because that is only a mitigating factor, it's the tacklers responsibility to avoid contact above the shoulder.

No intent on behalf of ML, but the correct decision was a penalty.

A game with some ' Jeopardy ' rather than teams going into rest mode when 3 scores down

Bring on next season

Obviously not as neither the ref or video team gave it that way

So I guess we'll never ever see or hear you question a referee again then.

Even Ben Thaler wasn't sure how to deal with it but by the letter of the rule book he got it wrong.

OH and as I type we've got Carney and Wells adamant that ML should have been red carded and sent off!

Thats why they are pundits and not refs

But they're right and so am I!

In my opinion it was a shocker, There is blatant contact to the head and he should have seen red. No less intention than Moon and Walmsley for me. He has gone straight through him shoulder first. Got to walk imo.

It was very similar to Walmsley IMO. It was NOT a shoulder charge, although there was contact with the head by the shoulder. He went to tackle him, got the angle of collision wrong, and made a careless high tackle.

We need to avoid being led up the garden path by SKY pundits on this issue of shoulder charges. All good tackles involve shoulders as well as arms. It's both desirable and legal. Occasionally arms and/or shoulders make contact with heads. Those are high tackles, not shoulder charges. A shoulder charge involves turning sideways on and making no attempt to use the arms as well as the shoulder. At the moment, some of the more excitable SKY commentary seems to be redefining shoulder charges as any high contact with the shoulder.

Apply to be a ref then, Russel ducked into the tackle trying to regain the ball, not much Leuleia could do about it