There's a difference between a swinging arm and a shoulder. I'm fairly sure if the Lee incident didn't happen last night Sam Moa would have stayed on.

If there is a red for every 'attack to the head' the game would end up 5-a-side.

So what would constitute a red then?

I don't know, zero intent to foul him.

Rinaldi stepped inside and by doing so dropped his body and head to shoulder height, complete accident.

That was my view of it, but then, I'm a Hull fan.

I would say a shoulder to the chin is far more dangerous than a swinging arm. There is much more weight behind a shoulder hit.

If it's high and dangerous how can it be anything but a red?

Haven't seen the incident but I don't like the way that a shoulder charge to the head is considered a great shot. It should be as illegal as any other high tackle, and if deliberate should result in a red card.

The sooner shoulder barges are outlawed the better, you are supposed to tackle a man.
High and dangerous to the head, red card not bottled unlike Bentham.

I don't think it was deserved. In fact I think Moa has got Tommy Lee's red from yesterday. I imagine referees went into their games today with last night's incident on their mind with a view to nipping biff in the bud. Cue Silverwood cacking it at the thought of "doing a Bentham" and he came up with a knee-jerk reaction.

I'd have sin binned him if it was me but I can see where Silverwood is coming from

Im not sure what Moa was supposed to with his shoulder. There isnt a great deal of vertical movement in the shoulder.

People who want shoulder charges to be outlawed should f off and watch Union. Some of the fantastic hits over the years have come from shoulder charges.

Perhaps Moa should look into improving his tackling technique if he can't tackle someone who steps inside of him within the laws of the game.