How is wetswoods not a grade d-f?

From the RFL websiteWhen tackling or attempting to tackle makes contact with head or neck of an opponent

[iA-B Careless - flat hand off balance
A-B Careless -ball carrier dips
A-B Careless - stepped and reaching
A-B Careless - initial contact with ball or chest
A-B Careless - second tackler in - wrapping tackle up
Reckless
B-C Reckless - tackler in control
B-C Reckless - tried to tackle but reckless about outcome
Intentional
D-F Intentional - clenched fist - intent to make contact with head[/i

Ridiculous that it is a B

It just shows our game is run by clueless idiots and needs overhauling, I applaud (if true) the SL chairman who are planning to stand up to the RFL. It shouldn't matter there is a World Cup round the corner, If this was a Gareth Hock or Ryan Bailey they would be both looking at 4-5 games IMO. I'm just glad justice was done in the end with a losers medal for him.

It's an absolute disgrace and shows the RFL for the spineless, gutless morons that they are.

The entire disciplinary is joke.

The fact that friendlies count for bans.
The fact that the ban doesn't count for the competition it occured in.........i wonder why, with a world cup round the corner westwood hasn't received a grade d-f, which by their own guidelines, it clearly is?

I wonder

They've charged him for punching, not a high tackle...And by their guidelines for grading punching it's Grade B isn't it?

If he puts in an early guilty plea does it subtract a day from the higher range as he's pleaded guilty, or can they still decide it's only a one match ban so his EGP will mean he gets nothing? That'd be a joke!

He can't use an EGP as he's used one already

correct its been ruled as a punch and not a punch in a tackle or high tackle with a clenched fist?

funny thing it cant have been a punch as Westwood clearly states that he cant remember it happening and surely he would remember punching someone so it should of been a high tackle with a clenched fist.

I'm assuming all the ones calling for him to get a 184 match ban are the same ones that didn't want him near the England WC squad?

The incident is worth more of a 1-2 match ban, I agree. But the stupid thing is why should the ban count for internationals when the incident occurred in a domestic final? It should count for Super League only.

Let's fast forward to Saturday 26th October. 5 minutes in and Ben Westwood joins a tackle and gives Johnathan Thurston a right smack in the face and nobody sees it until the replay. Play carries on after a couple of minutes tending to Thurston's injury and no action is taken on the field against Westwood. Both sides are super fired up after this incident and the game develops into a classic international.

How would this thread look then?

People would still want him sent off.

The disclipinary system continues to be a joke.

Or scenario 2. Westwood gives Thurston a right smack. Ref spots it and red card for Westwood. Aussies run riot.

Westwood can rough the opposition up just fine without resorting to dirty tactics like he did in the final. Taking shortcuts rarely works.

Bulls**t. Even if there was no dirty tactics involved whatsoever, people on here would still be castigating him and calling for him to be banned for 149 matches.

I was a Wigan fan Saturday and he should have walked but I'm an England fan now and I'm quite prepared to forgive and forget! A token gesture of a one game ban will do just fine!!

It's incidents like these though that make me wonder why a ban should cover all competitions. He did it in club rugby so should be banned from club rugby not internationals.