this records getting boring now! put another on.

23 pages of utter tripe!

what is the usual ban for a head tackle, initial contact with the head?

1-4 depending on severity and grade strangely this grade b was 1-2 but limas was 2-3 earlier in the year for a much less dangerous and threatening tackle.

But that is your opinion, not the RFL's. Which is based on how likely a serious injury is to occur.

Lima actually got 1 match each for two separate offences in the same game

The level of debate is seriously going downhill at the moment with the Dire and Stains bottom feeders trolling on threads. Time for a clear-out?

I've just seen the incident for the first time since the day and I think a 2 game ban is about right. I wouldn't say the hit to the head was intentional but it was reckless and players need to take abit of responsibility in those situations.

Whatever you say, chum. We will absolutely take your word for the latter assertion.

This, oh, and don't forget Stu's mate.

Much as I dislike the Tomkins brats, and there is a feeling of what goes round comes around, it was a cheap shot and Ganson and Redhall dealt with it correctly. I still reckon it should have been an 8 pointer, but that is simply my interpretation of a badly worded rule.

Incidentally, in case nobody has mentioned it,.....it was an excellent try.

I suggest you go and watch the incident I'm referring to. It was a cowardly assault with the knees into a player in the act of scoring.

Alibert did nothing, other than warn Tomkins to be careful and it was miraculously not picked up by the RFL match review panel.

Tomkins is a talented player, but the absolute hysteria surrounding what happened on Sunday is farciccal one eyed stuff from Wigan fans.

I know but i mean the recommended sanctions on his offences were 2-3 and raynors was only 1-2.

Have you got a video of this supposed attack? Coz im pretty sure he was just sliding on the floor not jumping on top of him like a wwf wrestler like you seem to be making out. Also well done on noticing the irony of moaning about tomkins hysteria and not noticing your hysterical rantings about this myler incident.

If you want the definition of hysteria, then check back to the end of last season and look at the response - not just from the Leeds fans, but from the Leeds club and from the Yaaarkshire press - over the harsh language, and that's all it was, that was used to Danny McGuire after he injured himself while fouling a Wigan player off the ball. That was a truly pathetic outburst designed to do one thing only, to distract attention from the gamesmanship that McGuire had just displayed and which had backfired on him so spectacularly.

Note - not a single Wigan player laid a finger on him. But within days, according to the histrionics from over the Pennines, it was all our fault that he was so badly injured.

I suppose, in that respect, you could call it hysteria with a purpose. But it was still hysteria, and the really embarrassing thing for Leeds was that their coach and captain were indulging in it as well as their fans.

Don't want to trawl back to see if this has already been posted, but I recall plenty of experts on here who knew with total certainty that Raynor deliberately aimed for his head. And derided anyone who suggested otherwise.

Those experts might wish to reflect on the findings of the Disciplinary Committee: "The committee are of the opinion that this incident was a case of the player going to save a try with his arm outstretched to knock the opponents arm or the ball."

Clearly the Committee are a load of idiots, since they disagree with the experts.