i assume you are old enough to read?

go through the thread,
people post that mguire should have been sent off for what was a proffessional foul...mabe, but im not sure
some want Joel sent off for an act of stupidity....dont think it warranted anything more than a penalty..

neither incident has resutled in the concerned players being caled to see the disciplinary??

Buderus has been..........for a tackle that could have broken Prescotts neck.
he should have been straight of ..and a ref with guts would have......so stop whinging and face the fact you might be without him and the cheat for your next game

emotional retard?............i love it.

ive just told you niether was a red,,ffs

buderus should have been for a tackle that could have broken Prescotts neck....................which would have paled mcguires injury into insignificance

If thats the truth, then i'll have no hesitation in withdrawing my earlier comments about him play-acting.
Foul play or not....Costing us the game or not....I dont think anyone using this forum would genuinely wish to see any player seriously injured.
Should there be a rematch at Headingley, i for one would like it to be against a full-strength 100% fit Leeds side.
Makes victory even sweeter that way!

No. No, not at all.

Unlike you, I make the observation as an impartial individual.

I have been quite old enough to read for quite some time. Thank you for your enquiry.

I even recognised all the words in your initial post, it was the in which they were put together that I found somewhat ambiguous, hence my query. I wouldn't want to write any response to your arguments without being clear as to what they were. Thank you for the clarification, although it might have been nice to lose the attitude a touch. We're all (presumably) grown ups here.

Ignoring the tone, I am inclined to more or less agree with you on the first 2 incidents. The McGuire incident was a professional foul. That's a yellow card, not red in RL. He should have received said yellow. I've never heard of a professional foul resulting in a disciplinary hearing, so I think that is all as it ought to be. Danny McGuire will miss the next game anyway, but not for disciplinary reasons.

I think Joel Tomkins lashed out. The incident has been reviewed. I personally think he would do well to keep his temper in check, and his formal caution reflects that. Otherwise that seems about fair. Had he kicked with more malice, and should he do it again, I would expect him to be dealt with more severely. I hope he learns his lesson from the caution, because he's clearly a talented lad. He has an edge, but he needs to stay the right side of the line.

As for the Buderus incident, I have no problem with that being reviewed. For me it didn't look malicious. He drove in with the shoulder, nice and low. He lost control of the tackle and it became dangerous, exacerbated by the fact that the 2nd Leeds man had let go, which cost some stability. I am torn on the disciplinary's role in this. On the one hand, I think it was an error rather than a deliberate attempt to injure, and is the sort of thing that happens in RL. On the other hand, it is a dangerous error, as you point out, so I would not be totally opposed to the idea of the RFL handing out bans for this type of incident. Whether they go for a ban or a warning, I will be happy to abide by that decision, and promise not to whinge about it. I don't think I have done so previously, but you may recall something I've written elsewhere which was whinging. I'd be happy to withdraw it if you can bring it to my attention.

Thank you for your time.

Both very good points.

Joel, as rightly pointed out, needs to learn his lesson and behave himself. His petulant actions could have cost us a lot more than 2 points, and had a different refereee been in charge we'd have been playing with 12 men for at least 10 minutes I think.

I think we all agree that the penalty was for the mcguire 'challange' not the donald but the fact is they give it for the donald challage and the ball bounced in the field of play 10 yards from where it happened so it should have been on the 30 mark not the 40

You are wrong it was a penalty and the ref got it wrong ..The kick should have been taken were the ball hit the ground ..The Leeds player took the man out if he hadn't Wigan would have scored ..And I have no axe to grind The first one the ref called play on, it was and linesman who gave it for the second one with help from the video ref ,you could see the ref asking him to check

Pat wouldn't have scored, the ball went into touch. Clear penalty, though...and should have been 10m closer to the posts with another penalty for dissent.

No. Had it gone into touch on the full, then it would (should) have been 10m infield, but the spot is where it first lands (or is caught).