Tamou was never going to throw a punch. The NRL players have had it drilled into them for a couple of seasons now that a closed fist punch is an instant red card and many weeks sat on the sideline.
This is why, whenever there is a scuffle in an NRL game, they all stand about slapping each other like the three stooges instead.
This is also why Tamou stood up and slapped Galloway last night, instead of giving him a right hook - his self discipline took control.

Galloway, Garbutt and probably most of the Leeds side were no doubt frustrated at the way the second half had gone, which lead to the facial on the ground from Galloway and ultimately the punch from Garbutt.

I don't really care who was looking at who, or who had hold of someone's shirt. Garbutt is now facing a couple of games on the sidelines which won't help a Leeds side already struggling with injuries.

You can't say that, you'll be accused of lying and faux outrage!

It was a cracking punch, it wasn't one on one and it wasn't a fair shot it was cheap
If you admire that stuff go watch MMA, I'll happily stick to Rugby League.

What is difficult to grasp here is the "justification" for Garbutt's punch.
Tamou gave the Leeds player a tap, to show him that he wasn't happy with what had gone on in the tackle and
Garbutt decided to intervene, totally unnecessary and he'll cop a few games out for his effort, it was a decent shot though.

The over analysis by some posters is just plain ridiculous.

Galloway is more than capable of defending himself so, Garbutt shouldn't have and didn't need to get involved.

Cheap Shot from a member of the cheap shot merchants.

All because they were about to lose by the most points to the least convincing Aussie team of the series.

Bad losers as usual.

There is nothing usual about us losing!

As noted, NRL players have learned, a punch = a red, so just don't do it. Dumb, dumb, dumb. It was all Galloway's fault anyway. But Garbutt should have had more sense.

Still, good news for Leeds' next few opponents...

Quote: rollin thunder "I admired it, it was a cracking punch, no complaints from the opposition, it was a fair one on one punch, no cheap shot, red card and sending of sufficient. If you do t like it go watch cricket or basketball a non contact sport, this is Rugby League.'" Seems the opposition have complained and do have an issue with it! www.loverugbyleague.com/news_209 ... punch.html

Quote: rollin thunder "I admired it, it was a cracking punch, no complaints from the opposition, it was a fair one on one punch, no cheap shot, red card and sending of sufficient. If you do t like it go watch cricket or basketball a non contact sport, this is Rugby League.'" Seems the opposition have complained and do have an issue with it! www.loverugbyleague.com/news_209 ... punch.html

Not really complaining about it - just saying he thinks the NRL have done the right thing with the no punching edict and that there are better ways to be 'tough' - which you can't disagree with....

Though personally I do hate the 'no punching' edict - I think it removes some of the theatre of the game, and actually often ruins the spectacle as players become frustrated - there's certainly more niggle and pointless fracas nowadays - in days gone by, it would be sorted with a dust up and the game would move on.... I do appreciate the risks associated with punches to the head - but feel those risks are more pertinent with King kits - otherwise boxing would be screwed as a sport.

The frightening thing was how easy they made it look.

The effortless way which a simple pass would carve a gap open that was so huge reminded me of what you tend to see in the 70th/80th minute when a team is 30 points down, and they don't have any energy to make a decent defensive read. Except this was in the first ten minutes.

Just watch how easily the first NQC player waltzed through the Leeds defence - you don't see tries often like that scored in Super League where a player goes through untouched. We can't create gaps as efficiently or as well in this league.

Admittedly I thought Saints and Wigan were dominated up the middle, and the sheer strength of the forwards played a big part in those games, but it was more worrying how the skill level just isn't in the same ball park. Constantly undone just by the right pass, to the right man, in the right position. It was very strange to watch how relaxed and aware all those players looked, and each knew exactly what was the right option to take. After the poor Saints kick, look at how calmly the Roosters player handed the ball on to his team mate - just a complete knowledge and awareness of what to do in that situation.

I really hope all of the British game was watching with a pencil and paper, as embarrassing as it was for Super League, we really need to take note, learn, and aspire to be as good as that. Whatever it takes, the game over here needs re-evaluating.

The big difference is the number of options that they create when taking the ball to the line.
Over here, teams put a move on the opposition where a certain player is being set up to go through a gap, yet the Aussies seem to have 2 or 3 options, which of course makes defending so much more difficult.

I agree, the options they have create holes, a let of their tries, not just WCS but in the NRL in general aren't reliant on braking a tackle or a piece of brilliance. Whilst I personally prefer to see someone like Watkins do something freakish, the Aussies can do that and rely on putting a backrower through a gap.