why does it matter that Joel is Sams brother on a rugby pitch? Why should either be exempt from the rules because of that relationship?

Neither of them should be. Dissent is entirely down to the referees opinion and interpretation. Considering Ganson has dismissed both Sam and Joel for dissent in the past suggests that he'll do them no favours, but on this occasion he obviously felt that a verbal warning was the correct action. The fact that they are brothers is likely to have an impact on how they react in certain situations though.

Quote: Hartster "How badly hurt was Tomkins?. So badly hurt that he was able to keep possession and ground the ball cleanly? There wasn't a mark on him when he went up the tunnel after the game.'" Watch it here and see for yourself news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 509140.stm Tomkin's was clearly spark out. He grounded the ball by sheer luck because of how close he was to the floor

Quote: Hartster "How badly hurt was Tomkins?. So badly hurt that he was able to keep possession and ground the ball cleanly? There wasn't a mark on him when he went up the tunnel after the game.'" Watch it here and see for yourself news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 509140.stm Tomkin's was clearly spark out. He grounded the ball by sheer luck because of how close he was to the floor

Terrible to see on the TV.

Eyes open and spark out- I was very worried until he stood up.

Understandable for JT to react to that. Some of his reactions are out of order but that one was understandable.

Stop trying to pretend that what happened didn't happen.

We all know what we saw.

did he keep hold of the ball when he hit the floor?..no? Enough said tool.

No response from Hartster??

There's not much else he can say. We all saw what happened. There is no dispute.

I have been doing a little winding up on the Bulls board and i have been very suprised by the level of paranoia from the Bulls fans who post there....... Bag of chips on both shoulders...

these forums were made for people with chips on shoulders

I have to admit to being very shocked as just how paranoid the posters there are...

I don't routinely go on other clubs' message boards, but I'll take your word for it.

I think we in Wigan are as good at doing paranoia as anyone, possibly better than most. But I'm really, really surprised at the resistance to responsibility the Bradford fans - at least those who've posted on here - seem to be showing with regard to the Raynor/Tomkins incident. This was as clear-cut a nasty foul as I've almost ever seen. And frankly, pointing to fouls that Wigan players have committed in the past, as if this somehow excuses it, is schoolyard logic.

That some of them have had the gall to call for the two-match ban to be appealed is amazing. For my money, it was worth another two easily.

2 more matches?.........in other sports he could have got charged with assault and ended up getting 2 month..........because it wasnt a foul, it was assault with intent.

Is he still on early release? Breach of parole?

To be fair, and I know that this may upset some. I do not think it was intentional, he thought he could knock the ball out. The consequence was far worse than the intent. It was dangerous, but I dont think delibrate. Sending off was fair enough.