I would like them both to play . It will give us a chance to see if our pack have definately got what it takes to compete with perhaps the best front row in the league or if we still desperately need this enforcer that everyone talks about.

The other way round for me, Morley was little late and a little high, definite penalty, possible sin bin, but not a ban.
Carvell led with the elbow / forearm, he looked the most surprised player on the field that he hadn't been penalised.

Morley was late and high and the player didnt have the ball, Carvell didnt raise the elbow but the player tackled him at that height for me

having watched it a few times i still recon he raised his forearm/ elbow.
dont think there is any getting away with that .

I think he got his head in the wrong place

So it's the tacklers fault for getting in the way of Carvell's forearm/elbow?

Was it his head? I thought the contact was into his chest.

It looked like his neck from my view. It's borderline, he may get off with just a fine. Morley should get a ban as his was a deliberate attack to the head to a player without the ball.

daft comment but yes, you can mistime and get the head in the worng position you know, I got knocked out a couple of times for getting my positioning wrong.

Carvell made contact with Jackson with the ball carrying arm, not as if he led with the elbow raised with the other arm.

Think you need to look at it without the tinted specs on. Personally I want him to play so he can get the same treatment as the HKR pack did.

like I said, Carvells wasnt deliberate

Please tell me you are joking? How you can justify leading with the forearm/elbow at someone's head/neck as the tackler 'shouldnt have his head there' is beyond me. Carvell should not be leading with his forearm in the first place, and tacklers should be able to have their head where they please without other players smashing them in the chops.

I can't tell between the two which is worse thats why am expecting both to be banned.