This.

Well if that's the case, Rovers should of had a penalty when Poore made that aggressive run at Withers head in the first minute, it's poores' responsibility to make sure he watches were he puts his head when running in to the tackler.

Hahaha what a load of rubbish, obviously I'm being sarcastic if you couldn't tell.

Agree. Very lazy attempt at a tackle.

Just seen the pictures of Withers' head on Twitter btw, very nasty!

Personally I didn't think there was much wrong with it. I don't believe it was deliberate as Ganson commented over his mic. I also don't think there was anything wrong with the tackle against Withers. It's a tough game.

IMHO Ganson had a howler tonight and wanted to look good on TV. Both sin binnings were a complete joke as well. It seems that since they introduced this new rule about the full team on a warning, the refs are looking for an excuse to use it.

I'm not saying that's the reason we lost tonight, we simply didn't have the manpower to compete.

Ouch.

Ganson said it wasn't deliberate. And I don't think it was - but that doesn't mean it's not a penalty. It was the right decision: if you are going into a tackle at high speed with a frankly somewhat risky angle of attack it's the defending player's responsibility to ensure nothing goes wrong.

What he said ^^^

He lead with his head and made contact with the head, accidentally or otherwise, so a penalty was the right decision.

Amor seems fine by the way - he Tweeted to that effect after the game.

I was sorry to see Withers go off in those circumstances - watched it back on Sky and it seems he got sandwiched between his team-mates; nasty injury, hope he's ok.

Withers' head

Headache in the morning! Ouch.

I missed the very start of the match, looking at that picture I'm very glad I did! Nasty nasty looking injury that one.

The Mika incident is difficult. I'm pretty sure Ganson's first reaction was a play the ball, which was changed to a penalty later (listening the the ref on Sky can be problematic with all the babble over it so there's a good chance I'm wrong). Completely unintentional, just went for an aggressive tackle, and if Amor hadn't stepped there wouldn't have been a head collision. But ultimately there was contact with the head, so I suppose a penalty isn't a bad decision. Thing is though 'contact' is made with the head in a hell of a lot of tackles, be it in the wrestle on the way to the floor, on the floor or whatever. What's the threshold that must be crossed to make it an automatic penalty? (Presumably I will be disappointed to hear the answer is 'discretionary').

Oh and teams better be extra careful when warned by Ganson by the look of things. Yay

Pretty sure it's the tackler's responsibility to watch where he puts his head (ie, try not get sandwiched by your teammates!).
Did Poore even make contact with his head?

Was the gash caused by the collision by the way? Because it looks like after the tackle Withers gets a stud across his head (when he's laid in the floor) but it didn't get picked up on Sky.

In regards to the penalty, he's come in in an aggressive manner leading with his head in a wreckless area. Totally accidental, but he's caused that so it's a penalty.

I thought Dobson was a moron last night when it came to talking to the ref. total lack of respect. Expect that sort of thing in football. If you don't like the refs decision, talking to him like a spoilt teenager isn't going to make things better!

I like the comment in Twitter "he looks like a baseball!"

No expert on medical treatment but the quality of those stitches does not seem great. Not sure they were done by the club medic or Pinderfields but if they were done in a specialist hospital they are not done to reduce the scarring.

Awful decision for me. Head collisions happen. Those saying it is mika's responsibility to avoid contact with the head, What about the other way round if an attacking player runs "aggressively" and a defender goes for a low tackle and gets cleaned out, is that a penalty to the defending side?