Course it is Morgan Knowles the other year gets banned for 2 games appeal still 2 games appeal again and gets away with it and plays in a final..Harry smith v cas does the same as Vaughan no match ban so he can play against Penrith it stinks as so does the game...bent and corrupt

I didn't get a good view of Vaughan's tackle, or the replay on the big screen. But am I the only one who doesn't think it was even a penalty? Did he actually lift his legs 'above the horizontal'?

Not a case of piledriving an opponent, but a Penalty for me (unfortunately), whilst I don't think the legs were particularly high "above the horizontal" it was more the way he landed that was concern and Vaughan by his reaction instantly knew it.

landed on his head and neck, he gave the referee a decision to make. it was daft.

but so was all of that opening stint by vaughan, worst 14 minutes he's had in just over a year.

Totally disagree re “bent” comment. I see this on other forums (especially you know where) and find it ridiculous. The only issue that totally baffled me was Harry Smith not being banned.
Vaughan was always going to get banned, no surprise at all.

We should definitely be appealing it to get it reduced - 2 games is very harsh when Smith got none. If we can't get that reduced then we really need to change our representatives.

The incident with Tyler Dupree in the Good Friday game, when he deliberately leads with the elbow should have been a hefty ban yet he wasn`t in that instance.

Double post.

Leeds appealing Cam Smith ban.

We've been successful in recalling Wood from Bradford, which eases the situation for the Leeds game somewhat. There are, however, a few players carrying niggles. https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... ds-rhinos/

We've been successful in recalling Wood from Bradford, which eases the situation for the Leeds game somewhat. There are, however, a few players carrying niggles. https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... ds-rhinos/

Would love to know what exactly Bullock needs to work on, games I have seen him in he does better than some of current forwards.

Yeah I've always thought of him as OK, spends too much time on treatment table (not his fault) but effort in games was fine I'd put him up as good as Philbin, but behind Vaughan, Harrison and Musgrove, but challenging for 17 with Philbin and Wood.

Bullock looks great with ball in hand but I think think Burgess is after a lot more work out of the middles off the ball. The last
few weeks Harrison and Philbin have put in quite a few lung busting runs to put pressure on kickers. It is that extra effort stuff. One thing with Bullock is that he is very North to South. He sort of struggles with lateral movement in defence. You notice it when he is defending and the opposition have passed the ball along the line he sort of relaxes rather than continues to push across.
You can sometimes see hesitation from Bullock when there are already 2 defenders in the tackle he is weighing it up, should I put the effort in as third man or should I just go back to the line. I reckon Burgess would prefer the just get stuck in and still get back to the line
think it is those sort of areas where he just needs to do those little things a bit more often rather than just once every now and again. He is a big unit but rather than trying to conserve energy might be better if he ran around like a mad man for 12-15 mins rather than try to pace yourself to do 22 mins.
When it comes to players playing in the middle of the park I guess Burgess knows what should be expected.

Good post.

Overall I like Bullock as a bench prop but I'll definitely keep an eye on him next time out to see whether he can find his inner 'Roy'.

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/62 ... l,-april-2

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/62 ... l,-april-2