"and your action in using your body weight to force the opponent’s arm and shoulder in an abnormal direction that involved an unacceptable risk of injury to that player."

Having watched the Wilkin tackle, I fail to see the above. If raising your arm as if in a classroom is an abnormal direction then fair enough, but I just don't see where there was any abnormal range of movement in the tackle.

Surely the same principle would apply to the challenge cup. If a player is banned during a league match then he counts the challenge cup games as part of his ban. Or if he is banned during a challenge cup final or round then league matches count as part of his ban. I. M. O. Lima should be ineligible for the WCC unfortunately.

As childish as you trying to claim that Wilkin was only looking out for his fellow players? I mean, what kind of cretins are you used to preaching to?

Given that Lima's missing the WCC as one of the games, a two-match ban is highly disporportionate, in my view. But Wigan aren't contesting it, so that's the end of the matter.

So long as the consistency is maintained all season - which we'll be watching for with deep interest.

Don’t you know you’re not allowed to base your opinions on trival things like watching the replay???

You have to base your opinions on what someone else has said.

Like the person who did it? Shocking isn't it.

What were your initial opinions of the incident? Did you think it was a chicken wing tackle?

I know I’m not on my own on this one in saying I didn’t think there was anything in it ad I’ve watched it a few times since I still can’t see anything untoward. Why should I now change my opinion because Lima has pleaded guilty? Do you not think he might have lied in order to get off lightly? We know that Wigan don’t seem to appeal anything the RFL hands out to them so maybe this was his only option.

To me the club have shown great restraint and respect to the disciplinary procedure and the RFL. They could of easily appealed and going off last year it would of probably at least got reduced by one.

To me the tackles didnt deserve a ban but i dont make the rules and i dont know to the exact word how they are interpreted i.e how much pressure on the arm gets you pulled up etc. I wouldnt be so pissed off if all similar offences were punished the same though. To get a 2 game ban for something that other players have only had a penalty against them during a match is just totally out of proportion and very unfair.

No issue for me - all it means is that a player who contributed to getting to the WCC will now get a chance to play in the game. It might lessen our chances of a win in the WCC, but I always thought we would be up against it in any case.

Hopefully Lima will learn some lessons from this and adapt his tackling technique accordingly.

Top of page 9He had to plead guilty to the Soliola one, but I've watched the Wilkin one a few times now and still can't make anything out.'"

i'm surprised that phil clarke didn't spot the incident

Too much imo.

Why show respect for it if all our rivals are abusing it? It only serves to weaken us and benefit everyone else.

I get that IL is building up IL’s rep since the mo days but sometimes we bend over backwards to please a body that has a serious agenda against us.

Btw I’ve seen Wakey have got Murphy off the hook. I really don’t see why we haven’t gambled.

It should be a a 4-6 match ban though.

He is guilty and, like the sensible people on here, fans should be breathing a sigh of relief he sin't missing the Wire game (although that would have been very harsh)

I think the fairest outcome was found. Hopefully he will learn. It is all on Lima now. I don't know what will happen if he is found guilty again. Anyone care to enlighten me?

Can't disagree with that - it was a sensible outcome, but was actually lenient given the sanctions available and the double guilty plea.


Upper range of the potential sanction I would have thought (3 matches per offence on this occasion).

To be honest if we had appealed i feel we would have lost. That lot would have loved to uphold the ban and add another 1 match for good measure.

I like the way that IL acts even if i do not agree entirely. This kind of situation on serves to build a siege mentality and i would not be surprised if MM used this negativeness to our advantage.

This is a much better situation than having IL looking like that prized chimp Heatherington or the like.