set a dangerous precedent by giving a penalty for that it was an accidental had clash, its a by product of the game and it will always happen. if thats a penalty the best 2 props to have are ian kirke and paul prescott as they get a head clash almost every game.

Can you read? Are you broken? Where did I say it's funny when a player is unconscious?

Wither's will have a banging head ache this morning! As for the Mika incident, it was a penalty but accidental. These things happen in such a tough, intense sport.

A penalty is a dangerous precedent? More like an innocuous outcome if you ask me.

However, I do agree that accidental head clashes will always happen, in much the same way that involuntary high tackles will always be made. Both worthy of a penalty and, in most cases, no more.

Deliberate for mine, he clearly is looking where he's putting his head, at best its reckless which as in law is equally blameworthy. Put him in the stocks ! Next case.

Any head clash will clearly be accidental 99% of the time. However, what parameters are there to say who is the offender? Most of the time the tackler is the one who comes off worse and the play is subsequently stopped. Injured
player receives treatment. Tackle count continues. No penalty. Does it become a case of if the attacker loses possession it then becomes a penalty? What I'm saying is, most head clashes don't often result in a penalty.

For the record. In theory Paterson's hand off in the first half was straight into (Tim Smith?) chops. Contact with the head? Try disallowed? Penalty?

No charge, accidental clash heads according to the RFL today.

Common sense prevails.
Probably a penalty, nothing more.

Yes, I can read thanks. Im just choosing not to get into a forum argument, and judging from your last post, thats what you're looking for in my opinion.

Indeed. Ganson got that decision spot on, and indeed most impartial observers seem to have thought he reffed it well. I agree.

I think most Wakey fans agree that the tackle was misjudged rather than malicious, and that Ganson responded appropriately.

Wasn't a penalty in my opinion. Total freak accident that he made contact with the head.

This what the rule book says;


15 Misconduct

Definition of misconduct 1. A player is guilty of misconduct if he

It may not have been intentional but it was reckless or careless and he made contact with Amor's head therefore a penalty. Ref was right to put it on report: disciplinary panel was right to judge that it was unintentional so no further action. No debate for me.