...only if they get it as wrong as Moa did....either bad timing or bad intent IMO!

Fair comment. His previous good record probably has resulted in him getting a lighter punishment than the tackle merited.

Its time to get rid of the current disciplinary panel who are obviously too lenient and replace them with some of the posters on this forum who seem to have more idea about the game than the people who are actually playing it.

Just watched the tackle. Rinaldi didn't duck into it at all - his head stayed at exactly the same level the whole time he went towards Moa. Moa dipped his shoulder into his face. Absolutely nothing to do with what Rinaldi did or didn't do, and deserving of a red card and worthy of a ban. If a Leeds player does the same I would hope they'd get exactly the same punishment.

I have absolutely no idea why some people can't differentiate that sort of effort from a legitimate shoulder charge. It does also show that using the shoulder is a high-risk way to tackle. It can look spectacular when it comes off, but can easily lead to injury - to either player.

See hits like that all the time in the nrl. only got sent off due to the player getting knocked out imo.

It was a bad tackle, but there seemed to be no malice intended, so 1 match ban and fine feel right to me.

Big hits using the shoulder are great for the fans to watch (but not for the ball carrier!), but tacklers need to learn/remember to bend their backs a little when going into the tackle to make sure it's a legitimate challenge.

Makali Aizue is a beast and regularly comes up with these big hits using the shoulder, but I can't remember him being penalised (and certainly not carded) for any of them. Whether they should really be allowed in the game is another matter....

Exactly that - if a player insists on using this extremely high risk 'tackle' technique, he has a responsibility to go lower, reducing the risk of hitting the head; if he doesn't do that, he accepts the possibility of seeing red, and rightly so.

And Eddy Pettybourne pleads guilty and is free to play. www.rabbitohs.com.au/News/Club-N ... d-One.html Now go and compare the tackles.

And Eddy Pettybourne pleads guilty and is free to play. www.rabbitohs.com.au/News/Club-N ... d-One.html Now go and compare the tackles.

Brisbane-You must understand that people who live in pit think it’s hard to knock people out legally or illegally and should be celebrated. (Moa will have a pair of Nike trainers hanging from the overhead electric cables near his patch) That’s why there is uproar at his sending of. Moa will now be the hero not the fat lazy villain that everyone else sees. Thickets don’t care if it puts the team under pressure, loses games or puts a mother of from taking ther kids to play the game as long as a Frenchman is on a stretcher. We know that their ugly fat molls of wives when not watching Jezza Kyle on the box will don there Ron Hills pants and T shirts light a fag and take there kids to the local RL club

As opposed to robbing Comet, Sports Direct, JD, etc. like in London

It was the guilty plea that got him the shorter ban. According to a local source the club were aware ahead of time that he would be found guilty regardless of what defence he might put forward so they went for damage limitation. I'd personally have preferred that they'd stuck to their guns but it's easier to stand on principle when you don't have responsibility for the consequences.

WTF?