The Australians have shown themselves in the WCS to be a brutal species of mankind. Mitchell Garbutt is an Australian, and was behaving like a typical Australian does on a weekend.

Nevertheless we must acknowledge that their brutality is part of what makes Australians, along with New Zealanders, the most powerful and accomplished rugby league players the world has ever seen.

I couldn't possibly say how many times that happens - all I know is that I watch most NRL games most weekends and in the past two seasons, punching has virtually disappeared from the game; granted, there are still many forms of housery that continue unabated, not least the forearm in the face stuff that Galloway used on Tamou. I would imagine in this instance, without Garbutt's intervention, Galloway would have given Tamou a similarly girly slap round the noggin, and the match would have continued.

And we agree about the punishment - it seems fair.

Are you 8 years old?

Agreed, and the point is emphasised by Frank Pritchard jabbing Adam Milner in the nose with the palm of his hand.

It's interesting to see the Leeds mob out in force on the forum trying to bully anyone who has an opinion which is opposed to the Rhinos

How are people getting "bullied"?

Another example of you and your ilk spouting ridiculous hyperbole rather than arguing a point. Two things, firstly if you're defending hitting someone in the face as acceptable just because you don't have a clenched fist then your earlier arguments are certainly weakened. An attack to the face is an attack to the face, not acceptable at all.

Secondly, I think you'll find that all the 'Leeds mob' has tried to do is bring some semblance of reason to a discussion that was rammed with ridiculously OTT statements. Nobody has said that what Garbutt did was OK, I don't think anybody has even complained about him getting a ban. What has been said is that it wasn't from the side; it wasn't a sucker punch; it wasn't an assault; it wasn't in any way shape or form comparable to the Ben Flower incident; it wasn't unprovoked; and it wasn't anything you're not likely to see at least another half dozen times this season.

Is talking reason now 'bullying' in the same way that a prop punching another prop is now 'thuggery and assault'?

There is a world of difference in pushing someone in the face (because you are unhappy with something that has gone on in a tackle) and full on punching a bloke in the face when they are not expecting it..

I don't think anyone has condoned what Tamou did when hi got up from being tackled but, the reaction of the Leeds fans is utterly ridiculous and trying to justify, in any way, what Garbutt did is just wrong.

Did Gallagher really need some help, because he looks more than capable of looking after himself.

Not justifying it, just giving a more accurate report on it unlike yourself who is trying to lessen Tamou's slap to a "push" and the highten Garbutt's to "from the blindside".

No one is excusing Garbutt, he went too far. The one being excused is Tamou, his slap kicked it off but people are trying to excuse him staying he received a bit on the floor......well every player receives the same stuff during a game. I imagine Tamou as a forward gave a far bit out himself during the game possibly to both Galloway and Garbutt at times (who knows how Garbutt got that cut under his lip?), I didn't however see anyone else respond by slapping his opponent. In such a physical game as RL then such provocation as a slap is going to lead to the inevitable outcome, whether it was Garbutt or Galloway shouldn't actually matter if people on here are truthfully that disgusted by punching as they claim.

Did Galloway expect a slap (not a push, stop pushing your agenda) in the face? I don't think he did, but I haven't heard such outrage at Tamou's actions, it's all been directed at Garbutt. As for not expecting it, Garbutt had hold of his shirt and was toe to toe with him with his fist ready - other than sending a letter I'm not sure what more he could have done to make him expect it.



Nobody's trying to justify what Garbutt did, what we're trying to do is a) Explain that whilst not the right course of action it was certainly understandable, as from his perspective Tamou looked like he had punched Galloway. You yourself have attempted to justify what Tamou did in your first sentence... [i(because you are unhappy with something that has gone on in a tackle) [/i that looks like an attempt at justification to me.


Team sports don't work like that, and at least get the main players names right.

All we ask for is consistency.
Whist in possession of the ball, Tamou made deliberate contact with an open hand to the face of Galloway and got ten minutes.
Whilst in possession of the ball, Pritchard made deliberate contact with an open hand to the face of Milner and didn't get ten minutes.
If the offence is identical, why is the punishment different?

Sorry that I can't dissect posts but, there is little doubt that the "niggle" that had gone on in the tackle will have caused Tamou to react afterwards.
Yes, it was an over reaction but this type of thing happens far more regularly than you seem to be suggesting and whilst it's clearly not right, it happens.
You accuse me of trying to put some sort of slant on what I saw, but, the initial "strike" by Tamou looked nothing more than a tap, he certainly didn't belt him and whilst no player appreciates this happening (especially is you are getting well beaten). The reaction from Garbutt was well over the top.
IF he hadn't punched Tamou, it would have been a penalty to Leeds and nothing more.

After you viewed slowed down footage from different angles.

Much talk of how Tamou couldn't see Garbutt's punch coming, but considering Garbutt is 2nd marker behind Galloway then it's hardly a gimme that Garbutt could tell whether it was a open hand or closed fist and has just seen Tamou raise his hand to a teammate.