I'll take Salford to beat Saints this week and a top 5 finish

i have to ask, as it was apparent at the time, and tony smith has mentioned it post match and its in League express today as well.

Whats going on with Salford using the cannonball tackle ala wigan. There were a couple of awkward looking challenges where our players went flying, one in particular i think was haurauki who came in completely needlessly, from the side at the standing knee of ben currie, who was about to be released to play the ball. I know there were handbags between our forwards, that happens, but this is something thats not nice to see at all.

I don't recall you using that last year, I hope it was a one off and Iestyn hasn't decided thats the way forward for you.

I have to be honest and say I mentioned that during the game, a bit of niggle is okay but a cannonball tackle is designed too injure a player. You'd hope it was a case of it being mistimed but if it is a deliberate play I'd prefer not too see Salford use it.

I don't think there's any deliberate attempt or design to injure players. Harris has spent a lot of time with the players over the winter on wrestling techniques to try and slow down the opposition play the ball speed. That's something we've needed because too often in the past we have leg them dictate the pace.

I did see a couple of times a third player join the tackle while they ball carrier was still standing but before they were called held. I was a bit concerned about them, mainly as the Warrington fans shouted for it each time so heightened my awareness of them. They generally looked to be around the waist or a little lower to me, not near the knee, but I would like to see them again (I spotted it 2 or 3 times) to have a look at what was going on and which players were doing it (was it new ones who brought it with them for example?)

I think it's illegal now and nothing was done about it by the ref, if there was anything untoward I'm sure the disciplinary panel will pick it up. There's a fine line between using a third man legitimately to make sure the attacker hits the deck and is slowed down and an illegal one for being late or dangerous. Most teams use a third man and have for some time, it's where and when they hit that counts.

In general I was pleased with the way we controlled warrington's speed of playing the ball in perfectly legitimate ways (winning the collision as Paul Cullen would put it). Warrington are very hard to stop if you let them stay on their feet or let them up too quickly. There were some brutal but fair shots by Salford defenders that was great to see. That said we still struggled at times to control them which is testament to how good Warrington are and I think led to many of the penalties we gave away (defenders not being set so making clumsy/desperate tackles). Some were just plain lazy or malicious though I suspect!

It reminded me a bit of how the intensity in defence went up when Karl Harrison joined us back in the day. Was interesting to hear. Alan Hunte on devil in the detail reflect on how KH brought the latest techniques with him from Bradford and remember Rhino saying at the time how far behind Salford were compared to top teams and how much he changed. Unfortunately he wasn't given the time or the resources to make a long lasting difference and the coaches that followed didn't have the wherewithal or the resources to build on it.

After Harrison I think Wilkinson hoped buying the right players would be enough and it was never going yo be (esp on the budget he could afford). I think Koukash was clear from when he arrived that off the field was as important as the players and he's invested in back room staff and equipment in line with what the top teams do

I certainly don't think players have been told or coached to 'cannonball' or attack the knee. Like previous posters have said already, Harris has been working hard on aggressive defense and slowing the opposition. I think the problem with late hits like this is due to a number of factors. The referee allowing slightly too much time before calling held, fatigue, and game rustiness. It all adds up to things going awry and I think this is the reason we're seeing it at the moment. Give it a few games where players are up to speed with the game and fitness, and Refs have settled down after being rusty and they'll probably dry up altogether.

www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?5886 haurauki charged, for the cannonball tackle on Currie.

www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?5886 haurauki charged, for the cannonball tackle on Currie.

I’m surprised that the RFL deemed Westwood’ high tackle as ‘sin bin sufficient’, looked a blatant red card to me.

If Hauraki is banned, I imagine we will see Hock moved into either loose or the backrow with Hansen and Paterson with Lama Tasi returning to take the vacant prop position. Best scenario all round, because Hock is far more dangerous running outwide than he is in the middle of the park.

If hauraki did a cannonball challenge then he deserves the ban but how westwood got away with his forearm smash is beyond me!

Not too fussed the committee aren't meeting until October 10th according to the RFL website. Can the RFL get anything right?

Just seen the highlights and if Walne gets 10 minutes how does Westwood not get marched with a red. One was clumbsey the other was a deliberate foul.

Walne's was for persistent offences, we were (quite rightly) on a team warning.

Westwood's forearm?? seriously the standard of refereeing already this year has me worried. Really poor.