'...the kid has gone from almost standing upright to dipping down...'


This would be from the same coach who last year said, 'But when you decide to make a tackle and the ball carrier dips, for whatever the reason, the onus has always been on the defender. It's going to be interesting to see how defences go from here on in. They'll go to every judiciary disciplinary meeting and say, 'well the ball carrier was dipping.'

Hypocrite.

Must be the only lad from Cas to be able to spell hypocrite. Obviously been exiled for a while.

I would tend to side with Smith here and suggest that coaches shouldn't be making comments about incidents that are subject to disciplinary procedures. Let the system take it's course first.

We need to look wider than a specific incident. The number of suspensions for incidents that go unpunished is alarming - on field officials are missing far too much serious and dangerous foul play.

"We feel that Benny's chest was the thing that came into contact with Luke Gale's face".

Unfortunately, this is the sort if ridiculous thing coaches claim with a massive club bias. It actually makes him look more stupid that Powell, who should have declined to comment until after the hearing.

It's about time all the clubs came together to protect the safety of players rather than pick and choose.

Karma Police must have been present at the hearing, i expect every charge he gets from now on will result in a longer ban every time, just to make up for the ones he got away with..what goes around..etc..

Really poor from Tony Smith that. It was a poor tackle. For me the lateness wasn't the issue. It's the fact it clearly impacts the head of a defenseless player that makes it worthy of a ban. Smith is claiming that it's his chest that hits the face? A bizarre thing to say when Westwood has had a right swing at his head.

It's really poor from TS, but yet if Cunningham came out with the same stuff (which he normally does after every game Saints lose) then you'd back him 100%.

I see around the boards there is STILL no mention of the late hit on O'Brien from Carney. Why wasn't this taken to the disciplinary?

Call that a high tackle? That's not a high tackle, this is a high tackle ....rugbyleagueweek.com.au/wp-conten ... tackle.jpg Oh and if I remember rightly, Kevin didn't milk it, Warrington didn't even get a penalty and Ebo Nabuli got off scott free.

Call that a high tackle? That's not a high tackle, this is a high tackle ....rugbyleagueweek.com.au/wp-conten ... tackle.jpg Oh and if I remember rightly, Kevin didn't milk it, Warrington didn't even get a penalty and Ebo Nabuli got off scott free.

So what part do the match review panel actually play in these disciplinaries ? They managed to miss O'Brien being taken out twice ,once with a shoulder charge, & they managed to miss Masoe's intentional punch last week. Do they only review incidents that are brought to their attention ?

I agree with that. I may be biased but how anybody (especially TS) cannot see a swinging arm that makes contact with the head I dont know.

I don't actually recall a punch from Masoe?